The previous entry has obviously touched an issue of considerable importance and concern for many Christian Scientists. Does any faithful Scientist doubt that venality lurks deep in the lair of the Journal-listing beast? My faint hope was a false one; its bite is worse than its bark. The explanations of "mentor" which have been helpfully provided in comments to the previous entry by someone (or ones) actually clarify more than was intended. They smack of the parody diversion in the Trammell imbroglio.
Mrs. Eddy did not provide for mentors or even use the term, and she made a provision for everything a Christian Scientist requires. There are Christian Science practitioners and authorized teachers. Period. Mrs. Eddy makes their respective functions perfectly clear. That both have been corrupted in recent years by bureaucratic hootchy-kootchy is another subject. Despite the seemingly innocuous explanations, complete with smarmy standard-bearing, the mentor canard is an insidious mulligan on the Journal-listing course. If the usual information in the Journal listing application doesn't trigger any concern or results in an unplayable lie (no pun intended) the mentor mulligan is then played. It is a ruse to smoke out "insurgent" Che Guevaras before they become an official part of the system, even if it means foregoing the annual $250. Boston wants to know if those with whom the applicant is hobnobbing also pass muster. Ches or proteges of Ches must not be allowed a place in their cozy Camelot (to conflate a couple of metaphors).
"Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned? It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out." (Christ Jesus, Luke 14: 34-35)
Friday, January 30, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Journal Listing Crapshoot
Word has reached this distant outpost that The Mother Church is conducting, at the host's expense of course, a series of workshops to facilitate and encourage listing in the Journal as a Christian Science practitioner. This requires a workshop? Until recent years, at least, for those ready for this high-calling it was a fairly straightforward and well-understood process. So what gives?
One disturbing clue is that "healers" are being invited, not Christian Scientists who have had primary class instruction (now with a properly obedient teacher, i.e., one who is or was in lockstep with the regime in Bean Town). Obviously, if the standards for attendance are set at a subterranean level the likelihood is increased that a few abstracted "healers" will tumble fortuitously into the proceedings and help flesh out the attendance. There, after some astrological alchemy or whatever and maybe an official anointing, they will presumably be qualified to list in the Journal as a Christian Science practitioner. The required check for $250 or so would doubtless apply the necessary grease to the skids.
If anything resembling this is occurring it can only aggravate what we already have in the Journal listings, a potluck menagerie inflicted on those who are uninformed or new to Christian Science. Also, a loyal, well-taught Christian Scientist would probably not wish to find himself in the hands of a so-called C.S. practitioner who would also work for someone who is taking medicine or who is under medical treatment, someone who is venal, or someone who isn't even a bona fide Scientist. There is no asterisk or warning in the Journal listings to differentiate.
Additionally, the on-line Journal listing form, and probably the hard-copy version as well, has an interesting section for "Mentor". One assumes gurus, astrologers, spiritual advisors, and miscellaneous wackos would be acceptable. One can only wonder with trepidation what is going on. Of course, it is possible these things may have a bark much worse than their bite, but given the current "we answer only to God and maybe not even to Him" attitude at the Church HQ, it is not wise to be too eager to draw naive conclusions.
One disturbing clue is that "healers" are being invited, not Christian Scientists who have had primary class instruction (now with a properly obedient teacher, i.e., one who is or was in lockstep with the regime in Bean Town). Obviously, if the standards for attendance are set at a subterranean level the likelihood is increased that a few abstracted "healers" will tumble fortuitously into the proceedings and help flesh out the attendance. There, after some astrological alchemy or whatever and maybe an official anointing, they will presumably be qualified to list in the Journal as a Christian Science practitioner. The required check for $250 or so would doubtless apply the necessary grease to the skids.
If anything resembling this is occurring it can only aggravate what we already have in the Journal listings, a potluck menagerie inflicted on those who are uninformed or new to Christian Science. Also, a loyal, well-taught Christian Scientist would probably not wish to find himself in the hands of a so-called C.S. practitioner who would also work for someone who is taking medicine or who is under medical treatment, someone who is venal, or someone who isn't even a bona fide Scientist. There is no asterisk or warning in the Journal listings to differentiate.
Additionally, the on-line Journal listing form, and probably the hard-copy version as well, has an interesting section for "Mentor". One assumes gurus, astrologers, spiritual advisors, and miscellaneous wackos would be acceptable. One can only wonder with trepidation what is going on. Of course, it is possible these things may have a bark much worse than their bite, but given the current "we answer only to God and maybe not even to Him" attitude at the Church HQ, it is not wise to be too eager to draw naive conclusions.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
"...sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal."
To loaf blithely in matter is to become a character in a tale which will have a most unhappy ending. How often do we remind ourselves of Mrs. Eddy's statement "The belief of life in matter sins at every step" (S&H 542: 1)? If we are not growing in grace through Science alone, we had better be growing in grace through the suffering sin brings since "...God has sentenced sin to suffer." (S&H 322: 14-15)
We have a new President who has for many long months promised change, and we have as well a new year which can act as an added incentive for radical change and improvement in our own lives. Some commentators have pointed out that President Obama has promised much, perhaps much too much, but now that the sound of his orotund speeches has faded away, the time for action and results has come. There are challenging details aplenty and an obstinate host of devils in those details. Let us hope and pray that he does not come to rue how easy and cheap volubility is.
The Mother Church has apparently sent to all Journal-listed practitioners with an e-mail address the text of a high-toned and somewhat oleaginous Board statement which originally appeared in the Monitor, an article they obviously suspected went largely unread there. It contains a number of commendable and lofty statements which give the lie, to a faint extent at least, that the captain and officers of the ship are not wholly incapacitated in a muffling stupor. Unfortunately, for many life-long Scientists the loving sentiments expressed in the statement take the form of the bum's rush or the cold shoulder. Some grand initiatives may be in the offing, but it seems a cynical and insincere sort of ploy to offer nothing but verbiage. How much more meaningful the words would be if they had been accompanied by the announcement of even one or two concrete and inspiring actions.
One wonders if the reason there are no beefy activities being undertaken is that the Board simply doesn't want to invest their time and precious money in a dead Cause. But is their kit really that bereft of ideas which would benefit all Christian Scientists and the Church? It was suggested in an entry months ago that a new hymnal, with concordance, would be of real benefit to all. It would be a major undertaking, but some of the work was apparently done decades ago. We got a multimillion dollar library that benefits almost no one, didn't we?
Fortunately, none of this prevents any of us from living and demonstrating better today, this hour, the Science we have been given, thus fulfilling "his duty to God, to his Leader, and to mankind" and benefitting the Church as well.
We have a new President who has for many long months promised change, and we have as well a new year which can act as an added incentive for radical change and improvement in our own lives. Some commentators have pointed out that President Obama has promised much, perhaps much too much, but now that the sound of his orotund speeches has faded away, the time for action and results has come. There are challenging details aplenty and an obstinate host of devils in those details. Let us hope and pray that he does not come to rue how easy and cheap volubility is.
The Mother Church has apparently sent to all Journal-listed practitioners with an e-mail address the text of a high-toned and somewhat oleaginous Board statement which originally appeared in the Monitor, an article they obviously suspected went largely unread there. It contains a number of commendable and lofty statements which give the lie, to a faint extent at least, that the captain and officers of the ship are not wholly incapacitated in a muffling stupor. Unfortunately, for many life-long Scientists the loving sentiments expressed in the statement take the form of the bum's rush or the cold shoulder. Some grand initiatives may be in the offing, but it seems a cynical and insincere sort of ploy to offer nothing but verbiage. How much more meaningful the words would be if they had been accompanied by the announcement of even one or two concrete and inspiring actions.
One wonders if the reason there are no beefy activities being undertaken is that the Board simply doesn't want to invest their time and precious money in a dead Cause. But is their kit really that bereft of ideas which would benefit all Christian Scientists and the Church? It was suggested in an entry months ago that a new hymnal, with concordance, would be of real benefit to all. It would be a major undertaking, but some of the work was apparently done decades ago. We got a multimillion dollar library that benefits almost no one, didn't we?
Fortunately, none of this prevents any of us from living and demonstrating better today, this hour, the Science we have been given, thus fulfilling "his duty to God, to his Leader, and to mankind" and benefitting the Church as well.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
From the Pratfall Control Office?
The document recorded below was passed on to me by an acquaintance who said it was found on the sidewalk outside Symphony Hall in Boston. It did not appear to have anything to do with Boston Symphony Orchestra business, but this person thought it might prove of interest to me. It did. A first page (or pages) is missing, since it begins abruptly in mid-sentence. It had no author's name on the last page, and without a cover page which might have named the writer, one can only speculate on its origin.
"what a bunch of chronic whiners think. Ignore the garbage that gadfly Mr. H keeps spewing out. Someday he'll learn he's just wasting his time and boring a lot of fellow crybabies. And as for those other johnny-come-latelys, ignore them too.
"No, we're not going to take a stand one way or the other on homosexuality. Yes, of course we should say it is totally incompatible with C. S., but then we'd end up with a real mess on our hands if we did and lose their admittedly disappointing contributions to boot. The dissident crowd doesn't send us anything now and probably wouldn't even if we recanted. Just let them continue to stew in their own juices.
"Yes, in theory we may have been wrong to open the door to allowing practitioners to work for someone taking medicine or who is under medical care, but there are only so many ways we can scatter a few crumbs to those who are unquestioningly loyal to us (and act as additional eyes and ears in the boondocks). Ditto lecturers and new teachers. State COPs can't be everywhere. Lectures have been useless fluff for years, so why not at least let these eager wannabes make a little moolah off of them? The bonus is that none of this costs us a dime. The lumpenproletariat gets to pay for its own nannies.
"Yes, we should never have started the full-text edition of the Bible lessons, but it's the only cash cow we have. Just about everything else is a loss-leader. And if we eliminated it, most of the subscribers would quit doing the lesson altogether. Nobody is keeping those who want to from digging out their precious books and reading from them.
"No, we're not going to renounce the Gill book on MBE. If the usual complainers think it makes her out to be some kind of ninny, so what. They don't have to buy the book or read it. So the periodicals are a little light between the covers. What of it, since nobody reads them anyway. Anything deeper than what's there would probably scare off the few readers they have. And we're not going back to the original Christian Science Standard of Healing published in the November 1957 Journal. We've got to get more paying members, not fighten off those we have with impossibly high standards. By the time the yokels learn what a joke either of the two Harris versions is we'll be long gone. Some energetic Paul Pureheart can come in then and brush-hog this and a lot of other nasty briar patches.
"In summary, we're going to keep things as they are. We can't afford to upset any more financial apple carts. The noisy rabble outside the gates might as well learn who's in charge and that we're under no obligation to heed their complaints or concerns no matter how loudly or sincerely they voice them. Noblesse oblige isn't our policy and mum's the word."
"what a bunch of chronic whiners think. Ignore the garbage that gadfly Mr. H keeps spewing out. Someday he'll learn he's just wasting his time and boring a lot of fellow crybabies. And as for those other johnny-come-latelys, ignore them too.
"No, we're not going to take a stand one way or the other on homosexuality. Yes, of course we should say it is totally incompatible with C. S., but then we'd end up with a real mess on our hands if we did and lose their admittedly disappointing contributions to boot. The dissident crowd doesn't send us anything now and probably wouldn't even if we recanted. Just let them continue to stew in their own juices.
"Yes, in theory we may have been wrong to open the door to allowing practitioners to work for someone taking medicine or who is under medical care, but there are only so many ways we can scatter a few crumbs to those who are unquestioningly loyal to us (and act as additional eyes and ears in the boondocks). Ditto lecturers and new teachers. State COPs can't be everywhere. Lectures have been useless fluff for years, so why not at least let these eager wannabes make a little moolah off of them? The bonus is that none of this costs us a dime. The lumpenproletariat gets to pay for its own nannies.
"Yes, we should never have started the full-text edition of the Bible lessons, but it's the only cash cow we have. Just about everything else is a loss-leader. And if we eliminated it, most of the subscribers would quit doing the lesson altogether. Nobody is keeping those who want to from digging out their precious books and reading from them.
"No, we're not going to renounce the Gill book on MBE. If the usual complainers think it makes her out to be some kind of ninny, so what. They don't have to buy the book or read it. So the periodicals are a little light between the covers. What of it, since nobody reads them anyway. Anything deeper than what's there would probably scare off the few readers they have. And we're not going back to the original Christian Science Standard of Healing published in the November 1957 Journal. We've got to get more paying members, not fighten off those we have with impossibly high standards. By the time the yokels learn what a joke either of the two Harris versions is we'll be long gone. Some energetic Paul Pureheart can come in then and brush-hog this and a lot of other nasty briar patches.
"In summary, we're going to keep things as they are. We can't afford to upset any more financial apple carts. The noisy rabble outside the gates might as well learn who's in charge and that we're under no obligation to heed their complaints or concerns no matter how loudly or sincerely they voice them. Noblesse oblige isn't our policy and mum's the word."
Friday, January 16, 2009
Gilt Trips?
A naive and foolish optimism had some of us hoping that by now the Board of Directors in Boston would have realized in spades that corner-cutting and indulging in a shameless deshabille where our Leader, her priceless Discovery, and moral issues are concerned is a low-profit, bottom-feeding enterprise. What may have once returned a grubby, but worthwhile, profit no doubt yields less in these hard and faithless times. But as one sows, he reaps.
An unverified report said the Board's primus inter pares was recently on a working vacation in Florida, possibly sport fishing for some trophy catches from well-stocked larders and IRAs in order to maintain financially the Board's indefensible silence and cushy sinecures. One wonders wistfully how different the financial situation in Boston might have been if Principle and the Church Manual had been cleaved to instead. The price for a deal with the devil is dear for the buyers and beggars our precious Church.
It certainly looks to those who have their hopeful faces pressed outside against the cold window that the goats who were so warmly welcomed into the fold with the sheep have shown their gratitude and love for Mary Baker Eddy more with their solipsistic caterwauling (apologies for the mixed metaphor) than their checkbooks. One must assume that for the Board of Directors, thumbing their noses insolently at the irony of it, that silence is indeed "gilt" and pays the kind of wages they crave. As the adage says, silence is golden.
An unverified report said the Board's primus inter pares was recently on a working vacation in Florida, possibly sport fishing for some trophy catches from well-stocked larders and IRAs in order to maintain financially the Board's indefensible silence and cushy sinecures. One wonders wistfully how different the financial situation in Boston might have been if Principle and the Church Manual had been cleaved to instead. The price for a deal with the devil is dear for the buyers and beggars our precious Church.
It certainly looks to those who have their hopeful faces pressed outside against the cold window that the goats who were so warmly welcomed into the fold with the sheep have shown their gratitude and love for Mary Baker Eddy more with their solipsistic caterwauling (apologies for the mixed metaphor) than their checkbooks. One must assume that for the Board of Directors, thumbing their noses insolently at the irony of it, that silence is indeed "gilt" and pays the kind of wages they crave. As the adage says, silence is golden.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Time Again For St. George?
The brouhaha over l'affaire Trammell has deflected attention from a puzzle and what may be a serious, unspoken trouble. Ms Asher, as readers doubtless know by now, has nobly fallen on her sword and issued a statement/comment on the previous entry stating that now she does not even know Ms Trammell and that the whole matter is just a bit of tomfoolery gone awry. Is it remotely conceivable that the reporting of a meeting with Ms Trammell at a lesbian bar in NYC and some giddy enthusiasm by Ms Trammell over an eriscope by someone Ms Trammell doesn't even know would elicit no known denial or comment from Ms Trammell, even after two plus months? Instead she has apparently been as silent as a toadstool serenely preoccupied with the production of spores.
One simply doesn't josh like that or parody someone he doesn't know. A parody (the early denial) necessitates a fairly intimate knowledge of the subject. My sincere apologies to Ms Asher, by the way, for the careless and supercilious designation of Meow Mix as a sex club. According to her it is a lesbian bar. A little alarm went off as the former was being written, but it was inexcusably ignored. Nevertheless, where is Ms Trammell's indignation at being so misused? Or is there, rather, nothing to deny? Silence has by now become tacit acceptance of the whole story.
All this is just what The Mother Church didn't need. But if there is no something there, why not say so? My strong suspicion now is that the Asher article which spawned all of this accidentally, unthinkingly, or carelessly let a cat or two or three out of the bag and that as a kind of damage control and apology Ms Asher is hoping her denial that any of it ever occurred will swab the decks clean of any problems. But the time for a denial was two months ago, before we had a parody. Next she may be getting help from Mr. Tweedy's gnomes ("Chicken Run").
The Mother Church has admitted that membership is declining, that nothing they have done has had much effect on the decline, and that they need to return to basics, healing for example. But as Hamlet said "ay, there's the rub", for at the root of this may be a bugaboo which has stalked the Church for years and which should never have been permitted a legitimizing seat at the Christian Science table: homosexuality. When a deplorable compromise in standards is made it will eventually need to be confronted honestly and dealt with courageously in accordance with the standards Christ Jesus, Paul, and Mary Baker Eddy established. The displeasure of some, or even many, does not change what is right. Neither Christianity nor Christian Science is the plaything of secular convenience, self-righteous belligerence, or an arrogant majority. Until this issue is squarely faced and dealt with, it will continue to plague and hobble the Church. Unfortunately, it has now become a bellicose, card-carying dragon let loose in the pews and board rooms of our churches.
One simply doesn't josh like that or parody someone he doesn't know. A parody (the early denial) necessitates a fairly intimate knowledge of the subject. My sincere apologies to Ms Asher, by the way, for the careless and supercilious designation of Meow Mix as a sex club. According to her it is a lesbian bar. A little alarm went off as the former was being written, but it was inexcusably ignored. Nevertheless, where is Ms Trammell's indignation at being so misused? Or is there, rather, nothing to deny? Silence has by now become tacit acceptance of the whole story.
All this is just what The Mother Church didn't need. But if there is no something there, why not say so? My strong suspicion now is that the Asher article which spawned all of this accidentally, unthinkingly, or carelessly let a cat or two or three out of the bag and that as a kind of damage control and apology Ms Asher is hoping her denial that any of it ever occurred will swab the decks clean of any problems. But the time for a denial was two months ago, before we had a parody. Next she may be getting help from Mr. Tweedy's gnomes ("Chicken Run").
The Mother Church has admitted that membership is declining, that nothing they have done has had much effect on the decline, and that they need to return to basics, healing for example. But as Hamlet said "ay, there's the rub", for at the root of this may be a bugaboo which has stalked the Church for years and which should never have been permitted a legitimizing seat at the Christian Science table: homosexuality. When a deplorable compromise in standards is made it will eventually need to be confronted honestly and dealt with courageously in accordance with the standards Christ Jesus, Paul, and Mary Baker Eddy established. The displeasure of some, or even many, does not change what is right. Neither Christianity nor Christian Science is the plaything of secular convenience, self-righteous belligerence, or an arrogant majority. Until this issue is squarely faced and dealt with, it will continue to plague and hobble the Church. Unfortunately, it has now become a bellicose, card-carying dragon let loose in the pews and board rooms of our churches.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Purr
Although my head may be bloodied, it is unbowed. The rest of you should also be ashamed of yourselves for visiting this obscure blog that no self-respecting Christian Scientist has any business reading. This is a reference, of course, to the chastisement received in a comment to the previous entry, possibly from some drudge in Boston, for all the disgusting material posted here. Please be assured, however, that at least none of the comments is my own surreptitious double-dipping. But if what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and Christian Scientists have no business reading this blog and the comments thereto, what pure and uplifting business does Ms Trammell have with Meow Mix and eriscopes?
We are informed in an article ("Planet Waves") reprinted in Andrew Hartsook's latest issue of "The Banner"--bless his longsuffering heart--that the Planet Waves writer and Ms Trammell met at Meow Mix (definitely not something for your cat) some years ago while some "research"-- the writer's quotes, not mine--was being conducted. One suspects that research could be a Meow Mix euphemism for some very un-kittylike behavior. Meow Mix, in NYC, as most readers of this know by now, is among other things a hard-core private sex club of some sort. If a visiting lady pussycat wishes to, shall we say, scratch the tender back of another available lady pussycat they won't be shown the door. In short, you don't take your sweet little kitten to Meow Mix for an innocent frolic. This can be verified by a visit to the Meow Mix web site, but send the children outside to play before you do. Yes, one does rather wonder about that "research".
It is now being claimed by the Planet Waves writer, so one hears, that even the original article reprinted by Mr. Hartsook was just a joke and she doesn't even know Ms Trammell. Riiiiight! Mr. Hartsook confirms, deflates once again, their silly riposte that the Trammell horoscope and eriscope caper was just a parody. Parody of what? That she has a kitten-like fancy for horoscopes and eriscopes? This parody excuse appears to be a very lame attempt by some fellow-traveler of Ms Trammell to foist off on gullible rubes a clumsy Rube Goldberg of their own. The only parody here is the parody of a slick cover-up. Anyone still unaware of what this is all about is referred to two earlier entries of this blog, "Earth to Mary Trammell" (Nov. 2) and the following entry. As you read you may need to beware, though, of the sensual siren song of the Planet Waves business model.
Mr. Hartsook's "Banner" can be obtained from him at 2040 Hazel Avenue, Zanesville, OH 43701. His book Christian Science After 1910 is also recommended and can be purchased directly from him or from The Bookmark. That The Mother Church appears to be punctiliously straining at gnats in some of his articles (while, to many, shamelessly swallowing camels of disregard for the spirit of the Church Manual, if not the letter) shows that his carefully researched findings must fit them like a hair shirt.
The gods are just, and of our pleasant vices
Make instruments to plague us.
Shakespeare, King Lear
We are informed in an article ("Planet Waves") reprinted in Andrew Hartsook's latest issue of "The Banner"--bless his longsuffering heart--that the Planet Waves writer and Ms Trammell met at Meow Mix (definitely not something for your cat) some years ago while some "research"-- the writer's quotes, not mine--was being conducted. One suspects that research could be a Meow Mix euphemism for some very un-kittylike behavior. Meow Mix, in NYC, as most readers of this know by now, is among other things a hard-core private sex club of some sort. If a visiting lady pussycat wishes to, shall we say, scratch the tender back of another available lady pussycat they won't be shown the door. In short, you don't take your sweet little kitten to Meow Mix for an innocent frolic. This can be verified by a visit to the Meow Mix web site, but send the children outside to play before you do. Yes, one does rather wonder about that "research".
It is now being claimed by the Planet Waves writer, so one hears, that even the original article reprinted by Mr. Hartsook was just a joke and she doesn't even know Ms Trammell. Riiiiight! Mr. Hartsook confirms, deflates once again, their silly riposte that the Trammell horoscope and eriscope caper was just a parody. Parody of what? That she has a kitten-like fancy for horoscopes and eriscopes? This parody excuse appears to be a very lame attempt by some fellow-traveler of Ms Trammell to foist off on gullible rubes a clumsy Rube Goldberg of their own. The only parody here is the parody of a slick cover-up. Anyone still unaware of what this is all about is referred to two earlier entries of this blog, "Earth to Mary Trammell" (Nov. 2) and the following entry. As you read you may need to beware, though, of the sensual siren song of the Planet Waves business model.
Mr. Hartsook's "Banner" can be obtained from him at 2040 Hazel Avenue, Zanesville, OH 43701. His book Christian Science After 1910 is also recommended and can be purchased directly from him or from The Bookmark. That The Mother Church appears to be punctiliously straining at gnats in some of his articles (while, to many, shamelessly swallowing camels of disregard for the spirit of the Church Manual, if not the letter) shows that his carefully researched findings must fit them like a hair shirt.
The gods are just, and of our pleasant vices
Make instruments to plague us.
Shakespeare, King Lear
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Pollyannish, Perchance Pestiferous, Proposals
The folks in Boston are looking for submissions to the periodicals. Here are a few suggestions that the members of the Church Board of Directors might willingly undertake in a desire to help row their own boat.
1. An enthusiastic wrap-up of their many loving initiatives and accomplishments over the past year. This should easily fill a page or two, especially if a picture of their cherubic faces graced part of one page. The astrological sign of each would be a fine bonus.
2. Each month a Board member could be featured, sharing with readers his wit and wisdom and just a few of the ideas he has contributed for the betterment of the Church. If that well is a bit dry or brackish, maybe some clever doodles or creative noodling from a Board meeting would suffice.
3. The Board could no doubt have a lengthy round-table discussion of how the Gill "biography" of Mrs. Eddy has generously blessed Christian Science and Christian Scientists. A lot of us would be really interested in that.
4. Each month a Board member could take readers on a very personal walk through the MBE Library and let them in on the inspiration it has provided to him. Some heartwarming stories from visitors might also be included to flesh out each month's offering.
5. A hard-hitting article explaining to all those dunderheads out there where they are falling short in support of the enlightened Board leadership.
6. An explanation for those poor souls who must have missed it the first time around of the why and wherefore of "The Writings of Mary Baker Eddy". Some of us underlings don't get it.
7. Some fun fruitage from the fun C.S. website.
Those whose appetite for adventure has been aroused by the call for submissions to the periodicals are heartily encouraged to have a go at it. Personal experience compels me to add, though, that if one does venture into the icy waters of publication in the C.S. periodicals he should be immune to or have a high tolerance for frustration, aggravation, and rejection (sometimes after hopes have been raised). And while you are at it aim higher than "Deep Think", which is something of a misnomer. Neither deep nor think is a word which came to mind in my admittedly limited exposure to this series.
1. An enthusiastic wrap-up of their many loving initiatives and accomplishments over the past year. This should easily fill a page or two, especially if a picture of their cherubic faces graced part of one page. The astrological sign of each would be a fine bonus.
2. Each month a Board member could be featured, sharing with readers his wit and wisdom and just a few of the ideas he has contributed for the betterment of the Church. If that well is a bit dry or brackish, maybe some clever doodles or creative noodling from a Board meeting would suffice.
3. The Board could no doubt have a lengthy round-table discussion of how the Gill "biography" of Mrs. Eddy has generously blessed Christian Science and Christian Scientists. A lot of us would be really interested in that.
4. Each month a Board member could take readers on a very personal walk through the MBE Library and let them in on the inspiration it has provided to him. Some heartwarming stories from visitors might also be included to flesh out each month's offering.
5. A hard-hitting article explaining to all those dunderheads out there where they are falling short in support of the enlightened Board leadership.
6. An explanation for those poor souls who must have missed it the first time around of the why and wherefore of "The Writings of Mary Baker Eddy". Some of us underlings don't get it.
7. Some fun fruitage from the fun C.S. website.
Those whose appetite for adventure has been aroused by the call for submissions to the periodicals are heartily encouraged to have a go at it. Personal experience compels me to add, though, that if one does venture into the icy waters of publication in the C.S. periodicals he should be immune to or have a high tolerance for frustration, aggravation, and rejection (sometimes after hopes have been raised). And while you are at it aim higher than "Deep Think", which is something of a misnomer. Neither deep nor think is a word which came to mind in my admittedly limited exposure to this series.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Casus Belli: Mortal Mind's Aggressive Claims
The gaudy, meretricious, and ephemeral images and metaphors of the present age lead the unwary and somnolent down the pleasant-seeming garden path. Yet such a stroll will only be diverting or stupefying for a time. The Taxman cometh. To break this spell of materiality, it is not enough to desire something better; we must be willing to go to war for it.
The new year lies before us. Now is the hour to launch a D-Day offensive in our 2009 "warfare with the flesh" (S&H 324; 15). Mrs. Eddy does not use the word warfare often, but when she does she certainly does not mean a tepid or dilatory hissy fit, but a determined and unremitting effort to overcome error. The "Student's Reference Dictionary" has in part this definition of war: "contest; struggle with spiritual enemies". Mrs. Eddy and the C.S. Hymnal also use other war-related terms: soldier, warrior, war, battle, strife, conquer, armor. As has been pointed out before, Mrs. Eddy confronts us with the seriousness and significance of this struggle with Satan in her "Extempore Remarks" on a July 4, recorded in Miscellaneous Writings, pages176-177.
When Mrs. Eddy speaks of war she is not referring to taking up spiritual arms against a case of the sniffles. This conflict between the great red dragon, the basic lie, and Truth must be fiercely prosecuted until the Christ triumphs in one's consciousness. It is not necessary that each of us become W. S. Gilbert's "very model of a modern Major-General" in Christ's army, but neither can one afford the shame of being a carpet knight or miles gloriosus. A wholly united Church of worthy Christian (Science) soldiers would constitute a formidable army for Truth, but on an individual basis we cannot ignore Mrs. Eddy's admonition to take up "warfare with one's self" (Mis 118: 25) as well.
It is certain Mrs. Eddy would not have used the term warfare if she didn't feel our individual and collective lives didn't require that level of commitment. There is no doubt that had Christian Scientists as a church taken up with a vengeance arms against error decades ago, the world would be a different and far better place today. But that is, of course, no justification for dallying now, for our individual spiritual growth and prosperity depend upon it as well.
Note: A recent "advertisement" for Christian Science, or something, which appears (so one hears) on the back cover of a recent Journal, has excited a mini-Vesuvius of concern and maybe interest, which it was no doubt intended to do. It is hard to get too worked-up about it, however, since the numerous self-inflicted betrayals and indignities the periodicals, along with Mary Baker Eddy and The Mother Church itself for that matter, have suffered for many years has set an exceedingly high threshold for any fresh contumely or insult to Christian Science.
The new year lies before us. Now is the hour to launch a D-Day offensive in our 2009 "warfare with the flesh" (S&H 324; 15). Mrs. Eddy does not use the word warfare often, but when she does she certainly does not mean a tepid or dilatory hissy fit, but a determined and unremitting effort to overcome error. The "Student's Reference Dictionary" has in part this definition of war: "contest; struggle with spiritual enemies". Mrs. Eddy and the C.S. Hymnal also use other war-related terms: soldier, warrior, war, battle, strife, conquer, armor. As has been pointed out before, Mrs. Eddy confronts us with the seriousness and significance of this struggle with Satan in her "Extempore Remarks" on a July 4, recorded in Miscellaneous Writings, pages176-177.
When Mrs. Eddy speaks of war she is not referring to taking up spiritual arms against a case of the sniffles. This conflict between the great red dragon, the basic lie, and Truth must be fiercely prosecuted until the Christ triumphs in one's consciousness. It is not necessary that each of us become W. S. Gilbert's "very model of a modern Major-General" in Christ's army, but neither can one afford the shame of being a carpet knight or miles gloriosus. A wholly united Church of worthy Christian (Science) soldiers would constitute a formidable army for Truth, but on an individual basis we cannot ignore Mrs. Eddy's admonition to take up "warfare with one's self" (Mis 118: 25) as well.
It is certain Mrs. Eddy would not have used the term warfare if she didn't feel our individual and collective lives didn't require that level of commitment. There is no doubt that had Christian Scientists as a church taken up with a vengeance arms against error decades ago, the world would be a different and far better place today. But that is, of course, no justification for dallying now, for our individual spiritual growth and prosperity depend upon it as well.
Note: A recent "advertisement" for Christian Science, or something, which appears (so one hears) on the back cover of a recent Journal, has excited a mini-Vesuvius of concern and maybe interest, which it was no doubt intended to do. It is hard to get too worked-up about it, however, since the numerous self-inflicted betrayals and indignities the periodicals, along with Mary Baker Eddy and The Mother Church itself for that matter, have suffered for many years has set an exceedingly high threshold for any fresh contumely or insult to Christian Science.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)