CLARIVOYANCE. – It is difficult to give a fully satisfactory definition of clairvoyance. Etymologically, it means “clear vision, clarity of perception.” Even the most competent authors diverge on the meaning to be given to this word; hence, instead of “clairvoyance,” different terms are used: “metagnomy,” “double sight,” “lucidity,” etc. The definition proposed by E. Servadio (Enc. Ital., IX, p. 997), among the most felicitous, impairs the doctrinal unity that should, as far as possible, bind together the apparent multiplicity of phenomena. Indeed, Servadio excludes from his definition of clairvoyance all those facts in which the knowledge acquired originates from a mentality extrinsic to that of the percipient. Therefore, taking into account the multiplicity of hypotheses regarding the nature of clairvoyance, the following definition is proposed, one that aims to be comprehensive of the various tendencies, adequate to the essence of the phenomenon, while remaining sufficiently similar to Servadio’s, whose informing idea it reproduces, albeit with amendments suited to unify the mass of phenomena within doctrinal unity: “Clairvoyance is a comprehensive term for all those acts of knowledge whose object is any event or entity situated in space and time, and which occur without the use of the empirical senses.” A negative definition, but the only one possible today, since the intimate mechanism of clairvoyance, now a well-established fact, completely eludes us. The proposed definition states that the essential element of clairvoyance does not consist so much in the position that the event or entity occupies locally and temporally with respect to the knowing subject (the percipient), as in the para-normal mode of knowledge, which seems to occur only under suitable circumstances and in subjects with particular gifts, although, according to the latest research conducted in America and elsewhere (Duke University in Durham, Columbia University in New York, Hunter College, etc.), it appears that anyone, to a greater or lesser extent, possesses such a faculty, which is susceptible to development and proper education (cf.: J. B. Rhine, J. G. Pratt, B. M. Smith, C. E. Stuart, J. A. Greenwood, *Extra-Sensory Perception after Sixty Years*, New York 1940; J. B. Rhine, *The Reach of the Mind*, New York, Italian trans. G. D’Agozzo under the title *I poteri dello spirito*, Rome 1949).
Whoever is gifted with this power knows where others, being deprived of it, do not know; sees where others do not see at all; has clear vision, whence the value of the term “clairvoyance.”
The practical mechanisms by which clairvoyance is effected—or at least claimed to be effected—are manifold: for example, by gazing at shiny objects, such as glass or metallic mirrors (crystalloscopy), or even luminous objects; by using suitable detecting instruments; by establishing an intimate contact with the object to be tested, chosen in an appropriate manner (psychometry, from the Greek ψυχή = “soul” and μέτρον = “measure”), though this term is improper and ambiguous due to its use in scientific psychology with a quite different and proper meaning. Richet proposed a more suitable terminology, introducing the term “cryptesthesia pragmatica” (from the Greek κρυπτός = “hidden,” αἴσθησις = “sensitivity,” πραγματικός = “practical”); but this term has not gained currency.
The differences in technique generally depend on two factors: the nature of the event or entity one wishes to test, and the difference in the way one believes the clairvoyant process should unfold. As is clear,
The effectiveness of the technical procedure adopted depends on the greater or lesser correspondence it has to the objective laws that govern the mechanism of clairvoyance. Certainly, the matter would be quite straightforward if these laws were known. But here arises the true and radical difficulty: these laws remain extremely obscure even today. The studies conducted by Rhine (Duke University) have shed some light, but in general we move in the deepest darkness and amidst the gravest uncertainties. There remains only one remedy: namely, to resort to the criterion of probability, constructing hypotheses and theories as close as possible to what, based on experience, is believed to be the inner reality of the phenomena. Yet, thus far, none of the theories provides a satisfactory explanation.
Before examining the most important hypotheses and briefly critiquing them, it is necessary to firmly establish the objective reality of the phenomena. First, the facts are possible because, even beyond natural forces, God would always be capable—when He deems it fitting—of bringing them about. However, setting aside divine intervention (which cannot be invoked except in cases where no other power could produce the phenomena), the facts not only are possible but actually exist: this is proven by the overwhelming historical documentation, especially contemporary, whose genuineness, at least in general, is beyond all dispute.
A serious objection is that the facts may be due to random coincidences. While this possibility cannot be excluded in many cases, in very many others it can and must be entirely ruled out. To reach such conclusions, the phenomena have been reproduced in the laboratory in very large numbers and then subjected to statistical analysis. This has shown that whenever a human being acts as the agent producing the phenomena, the mathematical probability is always and greatly exceeded, so that it is necessary to admit in the human subject the existence of an extrasensory cognitive power ("ESP effect," i.e., extra-sensory perception, a term adopted by Duke University in Durham, North Carolina; the director of these statistical studies being Rhine). The use of the statistical method is not new; it was initiated by Richet in 1880, and by 1884 he had amassed 2,927 trials; Gurney collected 17,653. From 1880 to the present, 150 groups of major statistical experiments have been conducted, corresponding to about 5 million individual trials. Rhine and his collaborators applied the statistical method to a body of nearly one million experiments. The vast majority of these studies pertain to clairvoyance, especially its so-called indirect form, i.e., telepathy (a substantial portion concerns telekinetic phenomena, i.e., the "PK effect," meaning mechanical impulses at a distance: V. METAPSYCHICS). The results were brilliant and convincing. Besides Richet and Gurney, other scholars who engaged in these studies include Dessoir, Sidgwick, Barrett, Ochorowicz, Warcollier, Brugmans, etc. (v. METAPSYCHICS; TELEPATHY).
It is necessary to consider separately the theories that relate to so-called direct clairvoyance and those that pertain to indirect clairvoyance. In the first case, clairvoyant knowledge would occur by virtue of a direct action between the object or event and the perceiver, even if this is achieved with the aid of "detecting" instruments (as, for example, in dowsing [v.]). In the second case, the inner mechanism of the phenomenon is linked to the transmission of messages from mind to mind, i.e., telepathy (v.), regardless of the nature of the communicating mind: divine, angelic, human, of a living or deceased person.
In examining the phenomena, the first concern is to determine to which category (direct or indirect clairvoyance) they may belong. Therefore, some fairly simple criteria apply: direct clairvoyance may be considered more probable when all the following conditions are met: the entity or event perceived a) exists simultaneously with the perceiver, b) does not involve human beings in any way (for example, if it is an event in whose occurrence human activity plays no part). In all other cases, indirect clairvoyance is more probable, especially when dealing with clairvoyance of the future, where, for reasons to be discussed below, one often must even refer to a divine intervention, whether mediated or immediate.
After classifying a phenomenon into one or the other category, the hypothesis that best explains it may be proposed.
Among the most accredited authors regarding direct clairvoyance, the following hypotheses have been proposed to account for the phenomena:
a) They may be attributed to the action of a "sixth sense" or another "special faculty" of the perceiver (Richet’s crispesthesia);
b) To the extension of the subject’s perceptive faculties beyond the normal limits of intensity and especially of distance (teleaesthesia [v.], from the Greek τῆλε = distant and αἰσθησις = sensation: literally, "distant sensation");
c) To the subject’s reception of special, still unknown radiations emitted by the perceived object or by the environment where the event occurred and the object was situated in the past: in this case, it is assumed that the object or event has left its "radiations" in the environment (psychometric hypothesis, studied by Fechner, Buchanan, Denton, Myers, de Rochas, Bozzano, etc.);
d) To a hypothetical partial dissociation—not quantitative but active—of the perceiver’s soul from his body, so that the soul, being independent of space, could instantaneously know any object or event at any distance.
When, instead, it is more probable that the perceiver knows the object or event by means of a message transmitted from another mind—this being the case of indirect clairvoyance, specifically "telepathy among the living"—one might imagine a mechanism of action analogous to that of radio (Sinclair, Cazzamalli), or a "contact" between the souls of the agents partially dissociated from their bodies (telepsychism); however, rather than a contact between souls, it should be described as a contact between the activities of the souls. This latter hypothesis enjoys some reputation even in cases where the message is thought to come from the deceased. When the message is believed to come from a pure spirit or even from God, hypotheses arise that in metapsychics are unworthy of note, in occultist literature are ridiculous, and not infrequently blasphemous and mad.
Still within the scope of indirect clairvoyance, it is interesting to examine the most notable criteria by which scholars believe they can recognize, with some probability, the nature of the transmitting mind (living, deceased, pure spirit, God). If the object or event is present or past, and the perception is symbolic, teleological, or otherwise reveals intelligent elaboration, indirect clairvoyance can be readily admitted; yet it is theoretically very difficult to determine whether the intelligence belongs to a living person or a deceased one. The possibility of identifying the transmitting intelligence with that of a deceased person would, no less, resolve the problem of the soul’s survival after death—this being the suggestive thesis of spiritualism (v. SPIRITISM). Despite the claims of "spirit identifications" by deceased persons (Bozzano, Trespioli, etc.), due to the lack of scientifically acceptable experimentation and the numerous frauds detected precisely in the cases most invoked by spiritualists in support of their thesis, the decision on survival, at least by this means, remains sub judice.
Of particular importance is the interpretation of the phenomenon when the event or object is in the future; in such a case, the only plausible hypothesis is that of indirect clairvoyance. Setting aside for now the possibility that the transmitting intelligence is that of God Himself, it must immediately be
Telepathy among living beings is indeed self-contradictory. For whoever transmits would encounter the same difficulties as the receiver, namely the impossibility of knowing a future event, which by definition does not yet exist (unless it is foreseen in the causes that must produce it, as, for example, the exact date of a lunar eclipse).
The problem becomes more difficult if we ask whether other intelligences, distinct from those of God and living man, can know the future. Upon careful consideration, it does not seem possible to resort to anything other than the intelligence of a disembodied soul (the deceased) or a pure spirit (angels, demons). Whichever it may be, it remains firmly established that a future event, not yet existing and therefore not knowable in itself, can only be known through its causes. If the future event is due to the decision of a free cause, for example, a man, it cannot be known with certainty in that cause, but only conjecturally; otherwise, with manifest absurdity, the cause would be both free and predetermined. If the future event is due to a non-free cause, it could be known even by an intelligent being distinct from God, provided that such a being is capable of coming into contact with that cause, knowing it, and sufficiently analyzing its mechanism of action to infer the future effect. This would be the case, for example, of the premonition of a person's death from illness when, due to the inadequacy of human science, even doctors remain unaware of it, but it is clear to the intellect—infinitely more powerful—of a pure spirit. On the other hand, it is not easy to accept the intervention of the deceased, since it cannot be admitted that their intelligence has a natural power superior to that of the living. For even if we grant that the deceased, through a mechanism of action entirely unknown to us today, could naturally (that is, with only the powers deriving from their nature as a disembodied soul, without, therefore, God's aid) come into contact with a living person, for example, the person in the case proposed, it is not clear how their mind, not superior in power to that of the living—and thus, in the example, not even to that of the doctors—could have the ability to see what they cannot. Nor can it be argued that the deceased exists in conditions different from ours; it is not seen in what way their powers could be enhanced by their state of existence, which is certainly more debased than that of the living, in whom the soul is united to the body, that is, to its natural instrument of vital action and thus of knowledge.
The possibility that God may transmit to man any premonition of future events, whether dependent on determined or free causes, remains beyond dispute. Here, however, very serious questions arise concerning the manner in which God knows future free events and the agreement between divine providence and human free will. For their solution, one must refer to treatises on speculative theology (cf., e.g., H. Hurter, *Theologia dogmat.*, II, Innsbruck 1885, from thesis 97 to thesis 106). The intervention of God must be admitted only if every other determining cause of the phenomenon proves inadequate; certainly, in the case of the exact (i.e., non-conjectural) premonition of a free future, the cause of the prophecy can only be God.
Metapsychical scholars resort to hypotheses that render the fact of premonition plausible, remaining proportional to the knowledge of the living and the nature of disembodied souls; however, all these hypotheses are unsustainable, often ridiculous. Three are cited: a) life, which we believe to be a succession of events in time, is instantaneous, but we are not conscious of it; b) the soul, before incarnation, determines its entire future and even the date of its death (prenatal, fatalistic, reincarnationist theory); c) the events of this life, which are future to us, already exist and are present in an order different from ours, which could be the divine essence (i.e., God), or a “fourth dimension,” or the order in which disembodied souls and pure spirits exist (this order, outside of time, would allow the simultaneous vision of human events).
Myers, with his considerable authority, supported these doctrines (though not all), and before and after him they were taken up by various writers. But the hypothesis of the instantaneousness of life is inconsistent with the reality of facts; the prenatal theory clearly contradicts Catholic faith, the findings of psychological science, and the facts that attest that our life is not the fruit of decisions made before birth and therefore of fatalism, but of our free effort. The last theory might be accepted provided it is not claimed that the perceiver’s intellect directly sees the divine essence in this life: this in fact identifies with the errors of ontologism, condemned by the Church (Decree of the Holy Office of 14 Dec. 1887 against the errors of Antonio Rosmini-Serbati: Denz.-U., nn. 1891-1930); moreover, it is contrary to reason and experimental facts. The hypothesis of the “fourth dimension” is without value. The admission that for the deceased and pure spirits our life is entirely present simply because they are outside of time has no foundation: it would in fact imply admitting that an entity simultaneously exists and does not exist, which is absurd.
In conclusion, it can be said as follows: it is certain that telepathy exists, but it is difficult to recognize its causes: in most cases these are natural and must be attributed to a power inherent in living man, which can manifest itself under favorable conditions; in some cases, however, divine intervention is necessarily required. The admission of pure spirits as a cause of the phenomena is normally very unlikely; sometimes it may be plausible, even certain; that of the deceased is even less probable and always uncertain.
Alighiero Tondi
C. SPIRITUAL. — In the language of mystical theology, it is the supernatural gift of discerning by which spirit, whether good or evil, a soul is moved in order to guide it; or of reading the secrets of hearts, or of seeing and revealing past or even present events at a distance, which otherwise could not be known by ordinary means or according to natural laws alone. According to some, spiritual discernment would be an aspect of "prophecy," understood in the broad sense of knowledge of past, present, and future things unknown to the prophet (Sum. Theol., 2^{a-2^{ae}}, q. 131, a. 3); yet more commonly and more properly the term "prophecy" is restricted to knowledge and foresight of the future (Benedict XIV, De serv. Dei beatificatione et beat. canonizatione, I. III, cap. 45, n. 2).
An example of spiritual discernment would be the knowledge had in Rome on 7 Oct. 1571 by St. Pius V of the victory at Lepanto, at the very decisive moment of the battle (cf. Pastor, VIII, pp. 579–80); and that had by St. Teresa in Medina del Campo on 15 July 1570 of the massacre of 40 Jesuits at sea off the Canary Islands (cf. St. Teresa, Autobiografia, Italian trans. by C. Mella, Modena 1871, pp. 333–36); likewise the numerous instances of reading hearts narrated in the life of the holy Curé of Ars (cf. F. Trochu, Les intuitifs du Curé d'Ars, 2 vols., Lyons 1931).
Instances of spiritual discernment must naturally be weighed according to the norms of strict criticism so as not to fall into error, illusion, or credulity; yet, apart from those that can be explained by science and psychology, others will remain which, both in content and in circumstances, will require the intervention of a supernatural agent. For example, the most intimate secrets of hearts, concerning the state of conscience, vocations, and God’s designs for souls, cannot in many cases be read except by the interior light of the Holy Spirit, Who “penetrates all things, even the depths of God” (1 Cor 2:10).
One of the distinguishing features of these facts is the clarity, precision, and certainty of what has thus come to be known: “The Lord, though not showing Himself in sensible form, impresses Himself upon the mind with such clear knowledge that one cannot in the least doubt it, because He wills that the object remain so deeply engraved in the mind that we cannot conceive of any doubt about it, any more than we can about what we see with our eyes; indeed, even less so” (St. Teresa, op. cit., p. 366).
As for the manner in which spiritual discernment occurs and unfolds, those who experience it find no words adequate to describe it: “God instructs the soul and speaks without speaking. And this language is so heavenly that it is scarcely possible to convey it here below, however much we try to explain it, unless the Lord teaches it by experience” (ibid., p. 366).
It should be noted that spiritual discernment, being a gratuitous gift like prophecy, does not confer holiness nor presuppose it; hence even a sinner may be its subject; yet ordinarily it is granted to holy souls, so that they may be the better assisted in the mission entrusted to them by God.