The tender word and Christian encouragement of an invalid, pitiful patience with his fears and the removal of them, are better than hecatombs of gushing theories, stereotyped borrowed speeches, and the doling of arguments, which are but so many parodies on legitimate Christian Science, aflame with divine Love. – Mary Baker Eddy
Recently a fellow Christian Scientist made a comment on one of my blog posts that got me to thinking (which is always a good thing, right?) 🙂
Don wrote: “Mrs. Eddy pushes us to have ‘radical reliance’ on God–an impossible order if one wishes to be ‘fat and happy’ in matter, too. Consequently, some individuals find ourselves taking a ‘halting and halfway position’ in our religion and at that point begin accepting all sorts of logic that veers away from true Christian Science. Loving our fellowman who has opposing views doesn’t mean ‘getting in bed with him.’ …Medicine is a mind-science. Christian Science is Mind (God) Science. There is a dramatic and opposite difference between the two, and we must be careful to keep both feet solidly grounded in that ‘Science’ which does bless us and the world–in spite of how illogical it seems to the materialist or to those of us who want to ‘play nice’ with the world. It all boils down to our responsibility, and it can’t be shirked forever by any one of us. We must take a stand for Truth (God) if we wish to grow out of mortality using the same conviction as is recorded in Psalms ‘Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the Lord our God.” (Ps 20:7)’ “
Don’s post got me to thinking about just what “radical reliance on Truth” actually means. Is “radical reliance on Truth” simply a euphemism for “avoiding the use of traditional medical science”? Or does “radical reliance on Truth” mean something else entirely – something bigger, something more?
***
Only through radical reliance on Truth can scientific healing power be realized. – Mary Baker Eddy
If we would open their prison doors for the sick, we must first learn to bind up the broken-hearted. If we would heal by the Spirit, we must not hide the talent of spiritual healing under the napkin of its form, nor bury the morale of Christian Science in the grave-clothes of its letter. – Mary Baker Eddy
I’m thinking that we need to be careful not to bury the talent of spiritual healing under the “napkin of its form.” Whatever means a person chooses to use for healing – whether it’s naturopathy, traditional medical science, Christian Science treatment, or something else – that’s the form, the means, the method. The morale, or essence, of spiritual healing is Love – Love is the power that heals and transforms us. The God I follow – Love, Truth, Life, Principle, Mind, Soul, Spirit (synonyms Mary Baker Eddy, the discoverer of Christian Science, gave for “God”) – isn’t concerned with what kind of treatment we choose to use – Love is going to remain unchanging Love, and Truth is going to remain unchanging Truth, no matter what form or method we use for physical healing. Truth doesn’t have an opinion on which form of treatment is best for treating disease – because Truth doesn’t know anything about disease, to begin with. Truth knows only perfection. And Truth and Love are synonyms, so doesn’t “radical reliance on Truth” also mean “radical reliance on Love”?
***
Material methods are temporary, and are not adapted to elevate mankind. – Mary Baker Eddy
If Christian Scientists ever fail to receive aid from other Scientists, – their brethren upon whom they may call, – God will still guide them into the right use of temporary and eternal means. Step by step will those who trust Him find that “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.” – Mary Baker Eddy
Christ, Truth, gives mortals temporary food and clothing until the material, transformed with the ideal, disappears, and man is clothed and fed spiritually.- Mary Baker Eddy
Emerge gently from matter into Spirit. Think not to thwart the spiritual ultimate of all things, but come naturally into Spirit through better health and morals and as the result of spiritual growth. – Mary Baker Eddy
When I choose to use Christian Science for healing I know my thought is going to be “elevated” by the experience, I know I’m going to gain a greater understanding of God and of who I am as her child, and I know I will be transformed – not merely healed physically – but transformed.
I choose to turn to Christian Science for healing because it’s simple, natural, uncomplicated – it’s always available to me no matter where I am, or who I’m with, or what scrape I’ve gotten myself into “this time”. I choose to use my understanding of Christian Science to bring me healing because it has been proven to work for me.
My motives for choosing Christian Science treatment for healing have nothing to do with a fear of what other Christian Scientists are going to think of me, or because I’m concerned God’s going to be angry at me, or because I’m worried about being ex-communicated, or because I’m opposed to something else, or because I’m scared of medical science, or feeling angry, self-righteous, or smug. My motive for turning to Christian Science for healing isn’t because I feel the need to take a “stand for Truth” – Truth doesn’t need me to take a stand for it – it’s not in some battle it might lose – Truth was Truth yesterday, and will remain Truth tomorrow – and nothing I do is going to change that. Truth doesn’t need me to side with it to continue to be Truth.
I use Christian Science because it’s natural for me to do so – it’s natural for me to draw my thoughts close to Love, to wrap myself up in the power of Truth, to free my thoughts to dance in the celebration of LIfe. And it’s natural for me to experience healing by doing so.
And THAT is radical. man! 🙂
***
Students are advised by the author to be charitable and kind, not only towards differing forms of religion and medicine, but to those who hold these differing opinions. Let us be faithful in pointing the way through Christ, as we understand it, but let us also be careful always to “judge righteous judgment,” and never to condemn rashly. – Mary Baker Eddy
Adventures of the Madcap Christian Scientist 
I love this article Karen!
Oh, I’m so glad, Arlene! Thank you!
Excellent, inspiring, logical, compelling and helpful beyond measure. This article is powerful and I am so grateful to have received and read it. Thank You!
I’m so glad, patmcoil! I was really nervous to post it, to tell you the truth. I wasn’t sure what kind of reception it would get. But I had to. 🙂
Well, I can tell you that it helped ME! (:-)))). It is wonderful to have the courage to do what your Father tells you to do. Always remember… FATHER knows best. It was even a TV show. Sincere thanks Karen.
🙂
Thanks Karen! When I first started to read this, I went ‘oh no’, not this again. There seems to be a ‘nice nasty’ that often happens when a person of a religious nature makes a point. But, not you, the love comes across, the radical reliance on Truth, and not getting hung up on how that is evidenced for you or any individual. I’m glad you had the courage to post this; and keep dancing in the in the celebration of Life 🙂
Thank you, Joyce! I’m so glad this post resonated with you. I was nervous about posting it – but I’m learning I don’t need to be afraid. Your response means a lot to me.
Thanks for taking the time to comment over at SBM and bringing this post to my attention Karen. I have read it, just once, and do not at the moment have time to devote further to it.
I will be honest (as I always am, in general and with you) that on my first pass it makes almost no sense to me. It is of a form and language that is rather alien to me. My first instinct is to say that it is an attempt at internal logical consistency to prove a point by redefining words and terms. At first pass it does seem internally logically consistent, but for me that is a nugatory exercise – logically coherent does not equate to correct or true unless the foundational premises upon which the logic is built are also true.
That said, I am always willing to be proven wrong. Give me a few days and I will re-read it many times and ponder on it. I am a materialist, specifically a methodological and philosophical naturalist, so my first impression may also be my last. But I get the feeling you wouldn’t want me to just offer empty platitudes that I don’t agree with in some sort of misguided effort to spare your feelings.
I will be clear though that my goal is not at all to attack you, bring negativity, or do anything more than provide a sounding board for what someone like myself (the rigorous medical scientist) can interpret.