Rocky Mountain Presbytery: A Case of Occult Praxis

a scandal from the presbyterian church in america

Before the sirens start, check the Matthew 18 box. I shared the evidence for this article with three PCA Teaching Elders for my own counsel, and a permanent committee member of the PCA agency overseeing the Teaching Elder involved. The Teaching Elder involved in the matter has not responded to my communication, but I do not think he is so obliged. The committee member who received my report assured me the matter is being handled in Rocky Mountain Presbytery per the PCA’s polity. 

I delayed this article for a number of weeks, deferring to the initiative of PCA Elders. The public evidence has been removed from the internet. I have endeavored to shield from view individuals involved, obscuring specifics as I might. If you want names for gossip, I’m not giving them to you. 

I did not choose the word scandal. One of the first replies invoked it: “I know they don’t want to be the source of scandal.” A possible scandal would be mediumship within the ambit of a PCA agency’s responsibility. A larger scandal would be the PCA’s responsibility for assisting the instigation of mediumship. Is this a scandal? 

This article is a warning. The responsibility for this particular case falls to Rocky Mountain Presbytery. The scandal lies at the feet of the Presbyterian Church in America. The danger confronts the church more widely: occult practice does occur where Scripture is spoken of as authoritative. The responsibility, the scandal and the danger– none should be minimized.

Give no regard to mediums and familiar spirits; 

do not seek after them, to be defiled by them: 

I am the LORD your God.

Leviticus 19:31 NKJV

On June 20, 2025, the inaugural post appeared on a blog. The author describes herself as married, with well-grounded adult children. Her career has been in counseling. She exudes the solidity of a full life that has taught her much. She is credentialed, and experienced. She is also a longtime member of the Presbyterian Church in America, and that is not mere Christian happenstance. 

Her husband is a PCA Teaching Elder, laboring under the umbrella of a PCA denominational agency. Based on his resume the PCA has reposed confidence in him over many years. He is a seasoned minister, and a member of Rocky Mountain Presbytery. They are people of substance, well ensconced in the PCA.

She is surprised to be blogging. In the past she had taken satisfaction in a minimal online footprint. Why this uncharacteristic course of action? She says God told her to. Some would bluntly summarize cessationism as a rejoinder. Others might show only a slight tic at the diction. There is a spectrum; idioms aren’t literal; doctrine guns shouldn’t have hair triggers. My own temperament is intuitive, and I don’t even have a squint from my cessationism.

Automatic Writing

In order to explain the genesis of her blog, she describes her own devotional practice. She engages in automatic writing. This is where the squint and the tic and the blunt terms meet: It is a mediumship practice.

From Sarah Young’s Jesus Calling, I learned to pray in a new way that brings God’s Presence into prayer. I have two journals.  One is for praise and worship and the other is for thoughts, confessions, doodlings, requests.  After reading about the increased intimacy Sarah experienced, I wanted that, too.  I don’t do it regularly but when I do, I sit with my process/request journal and write:  Lord what do You want to say to me today?  Then, I wait, listen and typically fairly quickly I begin writing what He says to me. 

Automatic writing is largely familiar to evangelicals through the growing popularity of a book from the 1930s, God Calling. Effective efforts have been made to pass it off as valuable for professing Christians. It consists of automatic writing from a spirit claiming to be Jesus. It was Sarah Young’s self-reported treasuring of this book as her inspiration which rang loudest in the first outcries against Jesus Calling. 

The Wikipedia entry for automatic writing is useful (with some “wow” omissions), although it lacks even a cursory overview of the actual practice. A responsible account exceeds the limits of this article. Contrary to the tropes of Hollywood, it does not require the practitioner to enter a trance state. There is no inherent spookiness in setting or accoutrements. The medium's individuality and personality are not curtailed or compromised. It is not coercive. 

I have received significant instruction from Doreen Virtue. She once was a medium. Her conversion and maturation in the Christian faith are remarkable. She was a New Age guru, making millions over the years, appearing on Oprah and The View. She channeled both by voice from the stage in live events around the world and by automatic writing to produce numerous published books. Her expertise is invaluable. 

Inaudible Who?

To explain her return to blogging, the author provides an excerpt from an automatic writing session three years previous. She is clear: There is no audible voice. It is a written dialogue. (Not to trivialize, it’s like when a teacher requires silence but lets students converse by writing notes back and forth after the test is done.)

On November 21 2022, I wrote:  Father, I would like to be still before You now and hear Your Voice.  I am talking a lot and often to You.  But stillness?  Listening? I am lacking. I want to be still and know that You are God and if You want to speak to me, please give me ears to hear. This time, I heard His voice (not audibly) and wrote my response to what He was saying. “You want me to start a blog?”

He said: “Little ***** <a childhood nickname>, I want you to really, deeply on a healing level, to your core – know how much I value you and your life.  You don’t see purpose yet in all you’ve been through but you DO know that I have purposed all things for your good and My glory.  People have searched for you on the WWW and you have not been there.  I have helped protect you all these years, protected your anonymity, privacy.  Now…I want others to know you.  People from *** *******, *********, **** ******, **** ******.  I am glad you kept yourself from social media but I want that to change.

<I wrote: really?>  

I want to show you your purpose, how I have used you. I want to use you and your voice.  You have much to say and I value it ALL.  I love that you are detailed, see details, know the importance of details.  I made you this way because you are made in My image.  Yes, you have a sense of your impact on <therapy> clients who’ve thanked you through the years, beginning with resident ***** at **********************  in ************** ****. <She was my first client in graduate school who lived in a nursing home>.  I want your words to go forth now –  to many.  I will multiply the hearing of your voice.  I KNOW you will speak for Me.  I KNOW the depth of your LOVE for me.  Now I want to show you the depth of love I have for you. 

<I wrote:  Lord, per usual, I am afraid.>  

It is I, do not be afraid.  And as **** ******* ******  told you: Do not doubt in the darkness what God has revealed to you in the light.  

<I wrote:  Oh! how I miss her.>    

I know your Qs to me will begin to flow in and fill your head.  I will answer each question.  Trust me Little *****.  You are my treasured possession.  You are the apple of my eye.   I love you.”

This is run-of-the-mill mediumship. Note the Biblical diction: my image, treasured possession, apple of my eye, “It is I, do not be afraid.” The same is common with channeled entities. The substance sounds like the ebulliently generous self-esteem-blather  of Robert Schuller or Joel Osteen. Ego-stroking is a common motif with channeled entities. The rhetoric trades on intimate knowledge of the blog writer. Channeled entities show uncanny knowledge of mediums. (No, I don’t know how that works.)

The blog-writer underlines the intimacy by providing explanatory notes for the reader. Twice the other silent voice addresses her with a childhood nickname. (She refers to that other with masculine pronouns.) His praise of her usefulness cites her first professional client by first name, with institutional details. His concern about her absence from the internet points to four distinct communities from her earlier life. He gives the full name of a loved one now absent from her life, and cites a memorable aphorism given by her to the blog-writer. How many people share that same intimate knowledge with her? (I have concealed these details for the sake of discretion.)

As is mediumship, the excerpt is a one-sided dialogue. The writing spirit overflows with affirmation and affection for her, as much as with a sovereign attention over her life. She is touched by the intimate familiarity and sensitive replies to her rejoinders of surprise and fear. Her automatic writing is not mechanical. It is interpersonal, with the relational being just as important as the cognitive. She is communing with another personality. 

The other silent voice is a mind. It expresses and responds to emotions – surprise, fear, delight, deep love. He knows her history and traits – down to the details she cherishes. He aptly wields a fluent familiarity with Biblical diction and motif. He expresses strong and specific desires. In fact, the writing spirit has a purpose: It wants her to write as its proxy. He employs the aphorism of an absent loved one to quell fear that holds her back. Only the assumption that the writing spirit is benign obscures the obvious manipulation (Mt 4:1-11).

She is not a liar; at least, that requires unwarranted and derogatory assumptions about her. Performative deception is not in keeping with her reticence for public display on the internet. She is not pretending. This happened. There is another mind.

She is not a lunatic; that too requires ugly assumptions. Marriage, family, and vocation are thriving. It isn’t a fluke of health or pharmacology. Notice the three-year gap between the spirit-conversation and its publication. According to her account, she has done this frequently enough to generalize about the procedure. Take her at her word: This happened, not in her head but in her house. There is another mind. 

That is not the Lord. Jesus’ encouragement is not flattery devoid of His saving work. He does not speak so much of Himself without speaking of salvation, much less of His Father. With this writing spirit, there is no “Father” in the gushing declaration of love and admiration, just as there is no “Son.” Whoever-this-is does not explicitly claim to be Jesus – although that lie is heard by mediums. It takes a mind to lie, as it takes one to manipulate. There is another mind.

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, 

but test the spirits to see 

whether they are from God . . . 

1 John 4: 1

Identity NOT Sufficiency

Given the author’s citation of Jesus Calling, the primary obfuscation in that controversy must not be repeated here. This is not about the sufficiency of Scripture. She’s not claiming a word of knowledge: ”I just know something because God made me know it.”  It’s not even a Grudem-esque prophecy: “Thus says the Lord, pretty much. I just had these thoughts, because God works holy intuition.”  This is a conversation. It is another mind. “This other person just said something to me – see I wrote it down, and my reply too.” She transcribes a dialogue. Who is talking to her? 

Purportedly, these are sentences from God; they just aren’t inerrant. (Sarah Young’s framework, which the blog-writer appropriates elsewhere). They are valuable like the words spoken by a skilled pastor, or a wise Christian friend. The issue here is not the sufficiency of Scripture, rather the question is the identity of her invisible intimate. Other Christians have skin on. 

There is no reason to think that the writing spirit ever had skin on – or ever will. The diction of a therapist and the demeanor of a love-bombing abuser are real but shallow concerns. The issue is that this spirit wants her to treat it like God. It is not God. The appalling grandeur in the dialogue is that she will serve the spirit superlatively as it loves her superlatively. The occult is doing serious business with skinless creatures. 

The Lord Jesus has skin on; in fact, He has our skin on. He can produce in us service pleasing to the living God because He has assumed our nature and triumphed by it. Christians are His body – with skin on. That is why His commands and promises press us not only to the Word but to the ministers of the Word and the fellowship of the saints. Jesus triumphed with skin on. That’s how Jesus does serious business – with skin on. 

The writing spirit’s swaggering earnestness parodies the reality of Christ’s church. It is fellowship with Christians which outshines being alone with your Bible. The writing spirit is grotesque like a cult leader, manipulative. A mere cult leader will tell you anything (anything you will believe), to get you to do anything (anything he wants). A spirit is writing through her and to her. She is acting as a medium. This is occult praxis. It matters who is talking to her.

Is This a Scandal for the PCA?

It is scandalous. This blog post was a public and casual display of mediumship practice. It carries particular weight as an inaugural explanation of the blog’s purpose. From the dates provided, the practice extended at least over the last 3 years; in fact, the practice appears to stretch back over a longer period of time. The repetition was enough for the blog writer to remark on typical versus atypical experiences in automatic writing. This particular occult encounter was not an event of impulse, but an instance of a nurtured practice. (Acts 19:17-20 evidences that this can be true of believers.) 

It is not a scandal for the agency, the presbytery, or the session involved. Confronting the author, instructing her appropriately and assisting her in steps of repentance are sweet gospel labors imitating the Lord Jesus. This report of mediumship brings no blame on the officers or courts involved. Only pretending it didn’t happen would be scandalous for them. So far as I know, they have responded with admirable alacrity.

It is a scandal for the PCA. The blog writer specifically cited Jesus Calling as the inspiration and model for her mediumship. The book both prompted the desire and provided the procedure. The results are per the book’s (of course not inspired) promises. The author, Sarah Young, was a career missionary with the PCA’s Mission to the World. For 20 years the PCA acted like she and the book never happened, although denominational agencies benefited significantly from the royalties.

The PCA had a second chance to inquire towards repentance. They concluded otherwise. The 2024 General Assembly directed the Committee on Discipleship Ministries (CDM) to write a report assessing, “. . . the book’s appropriateness for Christians in general and PCA members and congregations in particular with special regard for its doctrine and method.” A year later, CDM discretely refused to provide the mandated assessment. The 2025 General Assembly silently welcomed that defiance; no commissioner raised the obvious point of order (Rules of Assembly Operations XIV-11.d.2). The Assembly’s apparent decency and good order played out 5 days after this public disclosure of occult praxis on the internet by 1) a PCA member, 2) married to a PCA Teaching Elder, 3) rooted in Jesus Calling. It is a scandal from the PCA. 

This is a Warning for the PCA

The New Age and Occult are being smuggled in, even by those speaking highly of Scripture. The Jesus Calling business has not been concluded. It continues in Rocky Mountain Presbytery, and that is just one place you now know about. When politely rejecting the requirement of the 2024 General Assembly, CDM opined that other authorities in the church might somehow be hindered by the rendering of pious advice about the book. Rocky Mountain Presbytery – and the other courts of the PCA – are on notice. They must address what God calls an abomination.

This recent non-chalant presentation of automatic writing raises questions. Her practice persisted for years before posting a public red flag. What steps should have been taken to reveal and address it three years ago? Are PCA ministers and sessions sufficiently prepared to recognize, assess and confront this kind of pathological piety among their members? Are the officers up to speed on the PCA’s homegrown mediumship instruction?

The pedestrian posting of automatic writing in the PCA is disturbing. She assumed her readers would respond positively to her account. How many others are inspired by and imitating Jesus Calling? Is private mediumship an accepted PCA devotional practice? What angel-of-light themes and influences are such mediums bringing into Christian homes and fellowship? How common, inconspicuous and tolerated is private mediumship in the PCA? 

The clear line from Jesus Calling to mediumship underlines the PCA’s responsibility. The blog post analyzed above coheres perfectly with the practice and expectations displayed by Sarah Young’s writings. How many people have been deceived about Jesus, inoculated against Jesus, by this book? How many quietly engage in mediumship– talking about Jesus while leaning on an incorporeal creature? Most readers are outside the PCA.

Tim Keller is an epitome for the PCA’s ambition, part of a cherished legacy. Sarah Young outsold Keller more than 7 to 1, and still does. The PCA’s own Mission to the World representative at her memorial service cited the numbers “45 million copies in 35 languages.” He praised Sarah Young for making the love of God known to more people than any other MTW missionary. Jesus Calling– inspiration and instruction for mediumship– is in fact the PCA’s largest legacy. What will the Lord do with that? PCA folk should ponder.

The PCA grassroots should recognize the book’s malignant influence and the likelihood of similar fruit wherever PCA grass grows. Conversing with familiar spirits is forbidden by the Westminster Standards, the examples of Scripture, and the law of God. “Medium” is not just a near synonym for luke-warm. It is an ugly noun for a person who communicates with incorporeal creatures. Don’t be embarrassed to use it. Don’t pretend that it is only found in Narnia or some other fantasy world. 

Is mediumship harmful? Well, it is disgusting to God. Before any other festering that comes from it – doing what disgusts God is dangerous in every direction. There is your warning. 

When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, 

you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. . . 

. . . But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this. 

Deuteronomy 18:9–14

℈ ℈ ℈ ℈ ℈

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, 

than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Hamlet Act I, Scene v.