Category Archives: inspiration

I’m not really interested in Mary Baker Eddy’s personal life. Does that make me, like, a bad Christian Scientist?

Posted on by
9

“Those who look for me in person, or elsewhere than in my writings, lose me instead of find me.  I hope and trust that you and I may meet in truth and know each other there, and know as we are known of God.”  – Mary Baker Eddy (The First Church of Christ, Scientist, and Miscellany, page 120: 2)

 “… follow your Leader only so far as she follows Christ.” – Mary Baker Eddy (Message for 1901)

So I got this flyer in the mail today, telling me about a good deal on biographies about Mary Baker Eddy’s life.  And… I found I wasn’t at all interested in it.  And I’m wondering… does that make me a “bad” Christian Scientist?

The thing is, I’ve always been someone who’s more apt to follow ideas than personalities.  I cherish the ideas that Mary Baker Eddy, the discoverer of Christian Science, brought to us.  I am beyond grateful to Mary Baker Eddy for the sacrifices she made in her life, and the challenges she had to overcome, to bring her discovery to the world – and I know enough about her life to know that those sacrifices and challenges were immense – her early widowhood, the betrayal of friends and family, poverty, her young son taken from her when she was ill, trumped-up lawsuits, hatred, bigotry, prejudice…

But…

In Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, the textbook for Christian Science, Eddy writes: “In founding a pathological system of Christianity, the author has labored to expound divine Principle, and not to exalt personality.”

I don’t believe Eddy wanted adulation. I do not believe she wanted those who consider themselves Christian Scientists to worship her, or to focus on her personality.

Eddy writes in Science and Health: “People go into ecstasies over the sense of a corporeal Jehovah, though with scarcely a spark of love in their hearts; yet God is love, and without Love, God, immortality cannot appear.”  And later she writes: “It was now evident to Peter that divine Life, Truth, and Love, and not a human personality, was the healer of the sick and a rock, a firm foundation in the realm of harmony… In an age of ecclesiastical despotism, Jesus introduced the teaching and practice of Christianity, affording  the proof of Christianity’s truth and love; but to reach his example and to test its unerring Science according to his rule, healing sickness, sin, and death, a better understanding of God as divine Principle, Love, rather than personality or the man Jesus, is required.”

So there you go.

The healing Truth, Love, is what a Christian Scientist follows, right? Not a human personality. Not a man. Not a woman. But the Christ – Love and Truth and Life.

In one of my favorite books, The Greatest Thing in the World, a sermon on I Corinthians 13, Henry Drummond writes: “‘Love rejoiceth not in unrighteousness, but rejoiceth with the truth.’… for he who loves will love Truth not less than men. He will rejoice in the Truth—rejoice not in what he has been taught to believe; not in this church’s doctrine or in that; not in this ism or in that ism; but ‘in the Truth.’ He will accept only what is real; he will strive to get at facts; he will search for Truth with a humble and unbiased mind, and cherish whatever he finds at any sacrifice.”

I love that – “…he who loves will love Truth not less than men.” It seems to me that thought is really the basis for all Science.  I believe that to be a true Christian Scientist one must seek Truth,Christ, not human personality.

The most romantic, over-the-top feel-good marriage proposal I have ever seen in my life. Ever.

Posted on by
2

Happiness is spiritual,born of Truth and Love. It is unselfish; therefore it cannot exist alone, but requires all mankind to share it. – Mary Baker Eddy

Okay, I just watched a youtube clip that still has me wiping the tears from my face.  I was so moved by this clip – so completely inspired by it.  It went waaaay  beyond your typical proposal of young man on bended knee proposing to young woman – no, this proposal included a choreographed dance to Billy Who’s upbeat song, Somebody Loves You and an ensemble cast of parents, friends, youngsters, oldsters – all there to support the handsome couple. This marriage proposal was testament to the power of community and the power of love. And part of what made the proposal so extraordinary, for me, was that the couple wasn’t a man and a woman at all – the couple was a man and a man… in Salt Lake City… Utah. And… did I mention that their mums and dads were there? Friends? Little girls in pinks tutus doing cartwheels? Babies? If you haven’t seen this clip, you gotta watch it – you just gotta!:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4HpWQmEXrM

This is the way it’s supposed to be. Acceptance. Support. Celebration. Love.

Last March, on the eve of our 29th wedding anniversary, I wrote a blog post in support of marriage equality (  https://madcapchristianscientist.com/2013/03/30/marriage-equality/ ). Even in the six months since that blog post there have been signs of progress that are giving me hope for mankind – and the youtube clip of the marriage proposal is one of them.

I look forward to that day when every citizen can share in the exact same rights as every other citizen of our land. 

Matrimony should never be entered into without a full recognition of its enduring obligations on both sides. There should be the most tender solicitude for each other’s happiness, and mutual attention and approbation should wait on all the years of married life…  Kindred tastes, motives, and aspirations are necessary to the formation of a happy and permanent companionship…    The scientific morale of marriage is spiritual unity… Marriage should signify a union of hearts. – excerpts from the chapter titled “Marriage” in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy

Let’s Stop Hating on Each Others’ Bodies (and On Our Own)

Posted on by
2

Love, redolent with unselfishness, bathes all in beauty and light. – from Science and Healthy with Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy

In the 1960s, you could eat anything you wanted, and of course, people were smoking cigarettes and all kinds of things, and there was no talk about fat and anything like that, and butter and cream were rife. Those were lovely days for gastronomy, I must say. – Julia Child

Last week a video clip came through Facebook featuring TV anchor Jennifer Livingston responding to a viewer who had written to her: “I was surprised indeed to witness that your physical condition hasn’t improved for many years. Surely you don’t consider yourself a suitable example for this community’s young people, girls in particular. Obesity is one of the worst choices a person can make and one of the most dangerous habits to maintain. I leave you this note hoping that you’ll reconsider your responsibility as a local public personality to present and promote a healthy lifestyle.” Jennifer Livingston’s response to this viewer was pretty powerful, and empowering. “I am, ” she said, “much more than a number on a scale.”  http://www.tvweek.com/blogs/tvbizwire/2012/10/video-tv-anchor-goes-on-the-of.php

Not long after this, I saw that the hilarious and talented Melissa McCarthy (of Bridesmaids and The Heat) had encountered a similar sanctimonious criticism of her weight by well-known movie critic, Rex Reed, who wrote: “As a critic whose opinions are constitutionally protected by law, I stand by all of my original remarks about Melissa McCarthy’s obesity, which I consider about as amusing as cancer, and apologize for nothing.” I love how McCarthy responded to Reed’s comments: “”I felt really bad for someone who is swimming in so much hate… I just thought, that’s someone who’s in a really bad spot, and I am in such a happy spot. I laugh my head off every day with my husband and my kids who are mooning me and singing me songs.”  http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/rex-reed-refuses-to-apologize-for-melissa-mccarthy-comments-i-stand-by-all-of-my-original-remarks-2013216#ixzz2ejUgTepD

It would seem that people who are perceived as “overweight” by others are, basically, being told that they have no right to use their talents and gifts and shouldn’t be allowed to be seen by others because it might set a “bad example.”  Overweight people should be, like, invisible…? Hide themselves away until they can present bodies that others find acceptable…?

And… SERIOUSLY?!!

Why do we do this to each other? Why do we feel we need to hate on other peoples’ bodies? Why do we think the size of other people is any of our business? Why do we feel the need to label everything and everyone as good or bad, right or wrong? And what makes us think that our unsolicited advise to someone else about her weight is in any way helpful to the other person?

***

Okay, what I’m about to present isn’t very Christianly Scientific, I guess – but I feel the need to present it just the same. After I read about the experiences of McCarthy and Livingston, I thought I’d do a little research about the correlation between being overweight and ill health. I’m guessing most of us have just sort of accepted what “experts” have told us about the bad effects of being overweight on health – certainly Rex Reed and the man who criticized Livingston’s weight have bought into the idea that being “overweight” is harmful to one’s health – and appear to have used that idea as an excuse to look down on others. But is it really true, from a medical standpoint, that being overweight hurts your health? Curious, I googled.

I found several sites that actually contradicted the commonly accepted meme about weight and health:

“Being overweight linked to lower risk of mortality” one headline reads.  http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/02/health/overweight-mortality/index.html

“Obese individuals with at least moderate CRF (cardiorespiratory fitness) have lower rates of… all-cause mortality than their normal-weight but unfit peers. In fact, death rates in the former group are about one half those of the latter.”  (Editorial, JAMA, 2004) And “If the height/weight charts say you are 5 pounds too heavy, or even 50 pounds or more too heavy, it is of little or no consequence healthwise – as long as you are physically fit. On the other hand, if you are a couch potato, being thin provides absolutely no assurance of good health, and does nothing for your chance of living a long life.” (Steven Blair, P.E.D., Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research, 1997.)  http://www.obesitymyths.com/myth4.1.htm

“Recent research suggests that people who are obese but metabolically healthy are in no more danger of dying from heart disease or cancer than healthy, normal weight people.”  http://news.yahoo.com/yes-obese-healthy-185800882.html

***

Okay, all that aside…

Do we think that we’re healthy because we don’t smoke? Do we think that we’re healthy because we eat right, exercise, eat an apple a day, get 8 hours sleep, take our vitamins…? Although it seems sensible to me – and natural – to move, play, run, dance – to express the movement and grace of God –  I also believe it’s natural for us to be healthy – I don’t believe good health is something we have to “earn” by rigidly following a checklist of do’s and don’ts. I believe good health is our right and it’s ours to claim right now.  I also believe that beauty is ours to claim right now. None of us can be “too thin” or “too heavy.” “Beautiful” is not something we have to work on becoming. I believe we’re already there. We can recognize it, right now, in ourselves, in each other, and in all of God’s creation.

***

As the physical and material, the transient sense of beauty fades, the radiance of Spirit should dawn upon the enraptured sense with bright and imperishable glories. – Mary Baker Eddy

 Except for the error of measuring and limiting all that is good and beautiful, man would enjoy more than threescore years and ten and still maintain his vigor, freshness, and promise. Man,  governed by immortal Mind, is always beautiful and  grand. Each succeeding year unfolds wisdom, beauty, and holiness. – Mary Baker Eddy

Immortal men and women are models of spiritual sense, drawn by perfect Mind and reflecting those higher conceptions of loveliness which transcend all material sense. Comeliness and grace are independent of matter. Being possesses its qualities before they are perceived humanly. Beauty is a thing of life, which dwells forever in the eternal Mind and reflects the charms of His goodness in expression, form, outline, and color. – Mary Baker Eddy

It is ignorance and false belief, based on a material sense of things, which hide spiritual beauty and goodness. – Mary Baker Eddy

Truth should not seem so surprising and unnatural as error, and error should not seem so real as truth. Sickness should not seem so real as health. – Mary Baker Eddy

Take my life and let it be
consecrated, Lord, to Thee.
Take my moments and my days,
let them flow in ceaseless praise.
Take my hands and let them move
at the impulse of Thy love.
Take my feet and let them be
swift and beautiful for Thee.

– Chris Tomlin

.

Things I Learned from the Year of Insanity

Posted on by
1

(All photos [except the Big Hand Karen photo, by Scott Terrell], were taken by Karen Molenaar Terrell.)

The other afternoon my husband and I went out for dinner at our favorite Italian restaurant. For whatever reason, I was feeling cranky.  Put upon. Impatient.  And then I saw the leaves on the tree outside the window, and I remembered what those leaves had meant to me during the Year of Insanity. I remembered a time when I hadn’t had a choice in how I felt – when I couldn’t seem to “make” myself happy, and had no control over what was going on inside my head. And I remembered the pledge I’d made to myself at the end of that long, dark time when I had a choice again: So long as I had a choice, I would never, ever choose sadness over joy. And right that moment, I let go of the crankiness, and, watching the leaves flicker on that tree outside the window, chose to enjoy my time at the restaurant.

The Year of Insanity was a whopper for me. I’d never experienced anything like it before – and don’t see a need to ever experience anything like it again 🙂 – but, looking back, I am convinced that I needed to go through that time. I learned so much from it – one of the chief things being that even when I’m depressed, I can be happy – even when I’m sad, I can experience joy. Another important lesson was that the pain passes – always, always. It doesn’t last forever. I learned I was strong. I learned I could survive.

There were certain things during that year that seemed to bring me peace when i looked on them. I can’t tell you why my distressed thought was comforted by these things – why they were the objects that seemed to calm me during that time – but I can tell you what they were: The leaves on that particular tree outside the Italian restaurant; sailboats on the bay; my hands; butterflies and dragonflies; seagulls in flight; and big bright sunflowers.

One of the things that happened to me during that time – and that has stayed with me – is that I began to – I was forced to, really – tune in more intensely to the beauty around me – I began to notice things in my surroundings that I might have just walked by in the past: Little insects on flowers; all the varied colors in the sky and water; clouds – I’d never so appreciated clouds before this time! The insanity forced me to live moment-by-moment, taking each moment one at a time – being grateful to have survived that moment before moving on to the next one. I learned to stop the constant dialogue in my head by taking a deep breath and focusing on the gifts of that moment – the dragonfly over the water; the sailboat gliding by; the flickering leaves on the tree. “Thank you, God, thank you, God, thank you, God” became my mantra. 

And one day I woke up and came back to myself.  I remember walking down the ramp toward the boardwalk – the bay stretched out in front of me, and a ray of sunlight breaking through the clouds and sparkling on the water – and I was free.

 The time to be happy is now. The place to be happy is here. – Robert Green Ingersoll

 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

(More about the Year of Insanity can be found in The Madcap Christian Scientist’s Middle Book.)

http://www.amazon.com/Madcap-Christian-Scientists-Middle-Book/dp/1477442456/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1378217527&sr=8-1

Sheer shameless schmaltz…

Posted on by
Reply

A year ago a friend of mine introduced me to the music of Jason Mraz. It is sheer shameless schmaltz and, being the schmaltz-monger I am, I love it.

One of his songs is called “I Won’t Give Up” and when I heard the chorus I realized I was listening to more than your basic love song. It seemed clear – to me, at least – that this was a promise to our world, and a love song to humanity:

I don’t wanna be someone who walks away so easily
I’m here to stay and make the difference that I can make
Our differences they do a lot to teach us how to use
The tools and gifts we got, yeah, we got a lot at stake
And in the end, you’re still my friend at least we did intend
For us to work we didn’t break, we didn’t burn
We had to learn how to bend without the world caving in
I had to learn what I’ve got, and what I’m not, and who I am

I won’t give up on us
Even if the skies get rough
I’m giving you all my love
I’m still looking up, still looking up.

Ahem. And it just so happens that my dear friend, Kathi, from Nova Scotia turned me on to a karaoke site last week… and it just so happens that Jason Mraz’s melody was on there!… and soooo… one thing led to another, and the next thing you know… yeah… here I am in all my schmaltzy glory:

http://www.singsnap.com/karaoke/watchandlisten/play/c386693c8

I won’t give up on us. 🙂

‘…you own your career!”

Posted on by
2

The biggest mistake you can make is to believe that you are working for somebody else. Job security is gone. The driving force of a career must come from the individual. Remember: Jobs are owned by the company – you own your career! – Earl Nightingale

Don’t ever let economics alone determine your career or how you spend the majority of your time. – Denis Waitley

Communication – the human connection – is the key to personal and career success. – Paul J. Meyer

***

A career is a precious thing – a gift I’m not sure I’ve always appreciated when I was  performing “A Job” – following orders, meeting “expectations,” carrying out “duties” – encumbered by the fear of losing my job if I didn’t follow orders. But those times when I’ve been inspired to go beyond the duties, expectations, and orders, and to overcome the fear of losing my economic security – those times when I’ve been more concerned about doing the right thing than “meeting expectations”  – those are the times when I’ve felt ownership of my career, and gratitude for it.  Those are the times when I honored the gift that had been given me.

And when, a couple years ago, I found myself in a position that no longer felt useful – and that didn’t build that “human connection” that Paul J. Meyer refers to in the quote above – I had no reluctance in leaving that financially-secure position for another that pays less, but gives me the opportunity to help my community. It took me awhile to reach that point, but once I did it was the most natural thing in the world to move on from one thing to the next. Without fear.

In Retrospection and Introspection, Mary Baker Eddy writes, “Each individual must fill his own niche in time and eternity.”  Note that Eddy doesn’t say an individual “might” – but “must” – fill his own niche in “time and eternity.”  It’s not like this is an optional thing. We all MUST be where we’re meant to be.

And in the book, Lectures and Article on Christian Science, Edward Kimball writes, “It is probable that there will come a time when you will be in quest of professional or business occupation; when you will be in want of a situation. Let us assume that you will be entitled to it and that it will be right for you to be employed righteously and profitably. Such an assumption as this carries with it scientifically the conclusion that if it is right for you to have such a thing, that thing must be in existence and must be available…One of the most influential human conditions is the one which I will call expectancy…You are entitled to the fullness and ampleness of life, but you will need to learn that gloomy foreboding never solves a problem and never releases the influences that make for your largest prosperity and advantage.”

It’s natural for us to fill our own niche, to find the gift of our own careers. We shouldn’t be surprised to find ourselves in the “right place.” We MUST fill our own niche. You were meant to have the career that brings you joy and satisfaction, that uses your talents, and that brings good to the world.

 

Sharing a Child with the World…

Posted on by
6

 Sharing a child with the world is the absolute in love — he will be in contact with more love than he has ever had in his life. And will of course share it all with you. It’s time to sharpen your intuition and other heartfelt communications skills. If you stay in tune with him, you’ll see how easy it will be to have him experiencing the whole globe and still be connected to your heartstrings. Try to stop mourning something that you did not lose. This “graduation” into adulthood will pay back endless dividends to you and to him. So — I know that I am sounding like a big smartypants….but it is true, I AM a big smartypants! Congratulations on this essential step in parenting. Don’t worry, you have job security. Forever.                      – Linda Sola

***

My oldest son left home yesterday to return for his final year at the university. This time felt different, to me, than the three times he’s returned to school before. This time it felt so… well… final. At the end of this school year he graduates, launches off into his “own life”, and maybe returns to us once a year at Christmas.

As the son was getting himself packed up and ready to go, I was trying to figure out what I could give him to send him on his trip. If I had a daughter leaving to go back to university maybe I’d give her a card, or some little sentimental trinket, or flowers… but the son is a very male male… still… I had a sudden memory of the son at about the age of three, sweetly offering me a fistful of yellow dandelions… he’d always liked flowers when he was little.

Was it my turn to give him a flower? How would a manly man feel about his mother handing him a rose?

Oh bother. I still wasn’t sure how to proceed, but my rose bushes needed pruning, anyway, so I decided I might as well start clipping off some of the buds – and if, when the time came for the son to leave, it didn’t feel quite right to offer him roses, I’d just keep them and put them in a vase.

And then a cool thing happened: As I was bringing the rose buds inside, the son looked over and saw them. “Pretty flowers,” he observed.

And suddenly it was the most natural thing in the world to say,  “I’m going to give one to you to take on your trip,” He smiled and thanked me – kind and generous in the way of a man grown – accepting my little floral offering with the same look on his face that I’d probably had when he’d once offered me his little fistful of dandelions.

The husband and I smiled and waved as our son pulled out of the driveway and headed back to school. And then I made my way to the solace of my Secret Garden, and remembered…

Andrew and dandelion

Aspirin and the 91st Psalm and a Most Uncomfortable Read

Posted on by
12

We may or may not have an operation, we may or may not take a pill, we may or may not observe religious rituals, but whatever we do (or don’t do) does not affect us either for good or for ill. – from Christian Science Re-Explored by Margaret Laird

I asked a friend why she liked to repeat the Ninety-First Psalm when she was in trouble. She replied that it gave her comfort. She did not realize that the comfort it gave her was the same kind of comfort that an aspirin tablet gives. There is nothing wrong about this if transitory comfort is important to us, and there are times when it may be. But Enlightenment is the real Comfort that we feel in our belief of comfort. The comfort that comes from reading the Bible or from tranquilizers is an abstraction, or belief of comfort, which can easily turn into discomfort. The comfort we need when we are in trouble does not lie in words but in Science, the discernment of spiritual facts, since being is Spirit. Unfettered by nice-sounding, comforting words on which to lean, the Scientist moves to a new dimension of awareness, unfamiliar but exciting and self- fulfilling. – from Christian Science Re-Explored by Margaret Laird

***

I just finished reading Margaret Laird’s book, Christian Science Re-Explored, and found it wonderfully uncomfortable. I found myself questioning concepts I’d always just accepted as true. Margaret Laird’s book “stirred the waters” of my thought and helped me re-think my beliefs about Christian Science, and look at it in a new way. And that’s not a bad thing. I can’t say that I accept as “true” everything Laird writes – but I get the sense that Laird would have been really disappointed if I did. In fact, one of the big themes in her book was the idea that we should never just blindly accept what any “authority” tell us is the Truth – that individual freedom to explore new ideas, and question old and accepted ones, is something to be celebrated, not squelched. Laird writes: “…the man of imagination…does not regard another’s point of view as needing either rejection or acceptance. He recognizes that dissent is often more creative, more stimulating to original thinking, than consent. This does not mean dissent from the standpoint of right or wrong, but dissent from the standpoint of a view of Reality other than one’s own. Often a viewpoint that differs greatly from our own will do more to stoke the furnace of imagination than one with which we agree. The acceptance of another’s point of view as right, or the rejection of it as wrong, would interfere with our own individual creativity.”

I’m still processing the thoughts presented in Christian Science Re-Explored – the author’s thoughts regarding The Bible, organized and institutionalized religion, Ecclesiasticism, Christianity, and the “technique” of “affirmation and denial” were really interesting to me.

Laird believed that if Christian Scientists use Christian Science as just another health care system – a method for healing some ailment – it’s no  different than any other system for treating disease. She writes: “He who prays with a goal in mind is not being the prayer of understanding or unconditioned Love…” and “Christian Science is not a technique or an argument by which we try to remove that which is objectionable to become something man already is but sees as a goal… He who professes Science, ‘declares the Truth’ as if it were an intellectual tool, a means to an end, will find desires unfulfilled, hopes unrealized, goals unattained. If our goals are unattained, it is because goals are on our mind rather than Science or self-fulfillment.” Laird writes: “The Christian Scientist who is Science gives treatments entirely from the standpoint of no goal, no result, no consequence or effect.”

In Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, the Christian Science textbook, Mary Baker Eddy assures us “Divine Love always has met and always will meet every human need.” In Christian Science Re-Explored, Margaret Laird refers to what she calls “compensations” as the forms, or mediums, that appear for meeting our human need: “Compensations on the human belief-level—food, air, exercise, sleep, and perhaps the ministrations of a physician— must be identified with and as Love. Their use must not be deplored or seen as obstacles in the path of demonstrating Health, Wealth, Happiness. The fact is that Love supplies the human need in the language of individual discernment. Compensations become obstacles only when the vision is too clouded to identify them with Love. The deplorable is never the use of the compensation, but the ignorance which would separate the compensatory image from Love. Love is the existence of everything contributive to well-being on the human belief-level.”

Laird asks, “Can you imagine Mind, Life, Principle, Truth needing to grow in grace or to sacrifice itself? Then why should man, whose existence is reflection, need to grow in grace or practice self- sacrifice?” I think she asks a really good question there. Starting from the standpoint of man and woman already perfect – reflections of Love, Mind, Life, Principle, Truth – how could we possibly improve or get better? In Science and Health, Mary Baker Eddy writes: “The great truth in the Science of being, that the real man was, is, and ever shall be perfect, is incontrovertible; for if man is the image, reflection, of God, he is neither inverted nor subverted, but upright and Godlike.” Eddy writes: “The Christlike understanding of scientific being and divine healing includes a perfect Principle and idea, – perfect God and perfect man, – as the basis of thought and demonstration.” Laird believed that to experience true healing one needed to start with the Absolute – perfect God and perfect man. She quoted her Christian Science teacher, Bicknell Young, as saying, “Let absolute Science be your one and only standpoint, for Christian Science is the only Science of Being and therefore the only standpoint from which to be. Give them (patients and seekers) the real, the absolute Science; then they will understand and not have to relearn—and not be confused. Explain from the standpoint of perfection; live from the standpoint of perfection . . . because ‘Perfection is gained only by perfection.’ Perfection is one and absolute. It is always its own protection, blessedness, bliss, and progressive unfoldment. . . .”

Well, dang. I already have 1154 words in this post – 1163 now – oops! 1166! It’s probably time to wrap this baby up: Margaret Laird’s book may or may not represent “Truth” – there were parts of it that were troublesome for me – but it was also wonderfully stimulating for me – got me thinking and questioning and looking at ideas anew. And I’m always glad for that opportunity.

 

***

Radical reliance on Truth has been interpreted inconsistently as the non-use of medicine. Scientific healing power has nothing to do with sickness but with ever- present self-fulfilling Health or Wholeness as one’s self. You may need a Christian Science treatment, a pill, a hospital or an institutional church for your personal identity. But, whatever the need, you have only to look out from your own Mind, God, to see that need supplied in discernible form. – from Christian Science Re-Explored by Margaret Laird

Christian Science is not practiced in words (incantations) or in deeds, but in understanding. – from Christian Science Re-Explored by Margaret Laird

Dry Bones or Lively Stones?

Posted on by
14

And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen; saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.  And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.  And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out. – Luke 19

 Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, as newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:  if so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.  To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,  ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. – I Peter 2

I just finished reading Stephen Gottschalk’s Rolling Away the Stone, which focuses on the last 20 years of Mary Baker Eddy’s life. It was not an easy read for me – it took several weeks to work my way through it – but I found it really thought-provoking. One of the themes that seemed to keep re-appearing was the idea of a “revival” – the idea of stirring up “the dry bones” and bringing new life to our Christian Science experience. Gottschalk quotes Mary Baker Eddy as instructing her student, Albert Farlow to, “…stir the dry bones all over the field, to more words, actions and demonstrations in Christian Science.”

Later Gottschalk writes: “As with other movements after the death of their founder, Christian Science became to a significant degree routinized, in the process losing much of the spiritual animus that accounted for its early growth. The pattern is observable, whether we are speaking of the early Christian church after Jesus, the Islamic movement in the decades after the death of Mohammad, or the Franciscan order after the death of St. Francis. Eddy appears to have anticipated with great apprehension that the Christian Science church, too, would settle down into a kind of bland predictability, when she was no longer on the scene. To her, being a Christian Scientist in any meaningful sense involved not only a strong commitment, but, in a sense, a spirit of adventure.”

Gottschalk writes: “What apparently concerned her the most was the prospect that the church would devolve into yet another ecclesiastic organization, ‘barren,’ to use her words in Science and Health, ‘of the vitality of spiritual power, by which material sense is made the servant of Science and religion becomes Christlike.’… This materialism could, she believed, take on ecclesiastical form. It did so when Christian Scientists, conditioned by their earlier adherence to orthodoxy, failed to break with outworn tradition, ritual, and other merely exterior forms of worship. ‘Long prayers, ecclesiasticism, and creeds,’ she stated, ‘have clipped the divine pinions of Love, and clad religion in human robes. They materialize worship, hinder the Spirit, and keep man from demonstrating his power over error.’”

Whoaaaah, right?

The Christ, Truth, is living, lively, dynamic –  it didn’t die with Jesus. And the Christian Science movement was not meant to stop and flash freeze at the moment of Mary Baker Eddy’s passing, either. I’m sure Eddy would not have wanted this for her movement. “I find the general atmosphere of my church as cold and still as the marble floors,” she wrote, after an appearance at The Mother Church,  “… I did feel a coldness a lack of inspiration all through the dear hearts… it was a stillness a lack of spiritual energy and zeal that I felt.” And, In Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, the textbook for Christian Science, Eddy writes: “The letter of Science plentifully reaches humanity to-day, but its spirit comes only in small degrees. The vital part,  the heart and soul of Christian Science, is Love. Without this, the letter is but the dead body of Science, –  pulseless, cold, inanimate.”

Life! Joy! Love! Aren’t these the way-marks of the living Christ – the Truth that heals?

***

Jesus was alone

when he rolled away that stone

Pushing back matter –

throwing away the tatters

And we have our job, too

to see what is real

to do what we must do

to rise up and heal

to laugh, dance, and sing

praises to our King

to stir those dry bones

and be joyful, lively stones.

***

(I’m sure Seuss would have done better

at writing this poetry-letter

But he is not here

and you’re stuck with me, I fear.)

There ain’t no midi-chlorians here.

Posted on by
Reply

Do you remember the first time you heard the term “The Force”? If you’re of my generation, it was probably in the late 1970’s – when the first of the Star Wars movies came to theaters. “May The Force be with you,” we heard the characters tell each other as they headed off into battles and adventures and saved-by-the-skin-of-their-teeth escapades. And we probably all thought that WE knew what the characters meant when they used those words – and were no doubt impressed by the characters’ highly-evolved sense of The Force, which, weirdly, coincided so well with our own perceptions and beliefs.

As I was thinking about George Lucas’s use of the term The Force this morning it occurred to me that using those two words was a stroke of sheer brilliance on his part. No matter what background and beliefs the members of his audience had, The Force was vague enough that we could all relate to it, and claim it for our own. For some audience members The Force probably represented nothing more than luck, and when the characters said “may The Force be with you” to each other, they were really saying, “Good luck!” For other audience members, The Force no doubt represented God – whatever they perceived God to be.

In the movies that first came out in the late 1970’s and the early 1980’s, The Force seemed to me to represent a power that was equally available to everyone. But in the Star Wars movies that came out in the late 1990’s and early otts,, The Force seemed to become less universal, and more selective. Now the characters talked about these microscopic life forms called midi-chlorians ( http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Midi-chlorian ) that connected humans to The Force – and we learned that there was a genetic or hereditary factor involved in the whole shebang – some people were born with more of these midi-chlorians than others, and had an easier time of tapping into The Force’s power.

And I found myself feeling really disappointed in the direction the movies had taken when it came to defining The Force for us.

“Heredity is not a law,” Mary Baker Eddy writes in the Christian Science textbook, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. “In divine Science, where prayers are mental, all may avail themselves of God as ‘a very present help in trouble.’ Love is impartial and universal in its adaptation and bestowals. It is the open fount which cries, ‘Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters.'”

No individual, no family, no dynasty, no nation, and no religion owns the power of Love and Truth. Having the ability to heal – to use the power of Good, God –  is not something we inherit from our parents or grand-parents. The power found in the Science of the Christ, Truth, is not genetic – it’s not like the midi-chlorians that “run strong” in the family of Luke and Leia of the Star Wars movies. Christian Science is available equally to all of God’s children – no one has more access to the power of Love than anyone else, and no one has less.

There ain’t no midi-chlorians here.