To my (perhaps flawed) perception there has been a desire on the part of those nominally in charge of affairs at the MC to try to proffer Christian Science as an all-inclusive clubbable, to use Dr. Johnson's word, religion. Whether one feels an impulse to rush to the defense of, toss brickbats at, or simply let Islam be, Scientists shouldn't forget Paul's injunction: "Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing".
As Christians and Christian Scientists we have a duty to love all mankind, but a foolish or naive camaraderie with those who have not a particle of love or respect for Christian Science is to create an inviting opening for the hagfish Antichrist. Christian Science is not a choice melange of tidbits from other religions, nor is it just a poor relative among the family of faiths dwelling in the great monotheistic tent oaisised in the midst of the vast desert of human misery. We must love all men, yes, but we should not feel compelled to tuck them in with us cheek by jowl at night.
Unless firmly and constantly resisted, the steady pull of aggressive mental suggestion and animal magnetism can and will draw us to the event horizon of the black hole of the Antichrist, and without clear spiritual reference points to orient and guide us we can drift amiably toward it unawares. To achieve the necessary spiritual and metaphysical escape velocity from the illusion of error and mortal mind requires pure, steadfast, and unadulterated commitment to the Christ Truth, not to an ecumenical, hail-fellow-well-met bonhomie with other religions, no matter how compatible with or friendly toward Christian Science they may seem.
As Scientists clinging limpet-like to our heavenly Father-Mother God, should we not, like Hardy's darkling thrush, express our heartfelt adoration and inspiration "Upon the growing gloom" in joyful carolings of "Some blessed Hope, whereof [we know]/and [mankind is] unaware"? ("The Darkling Thrush")
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
Extremely fine. It's good to be back reading your essays, Christian.
With my thanks,
Another wonderful blog posting, Christian. You've said just what I've been thinking, and said it well, I might add.
You write so well. Your title set up this piece beautifully.
Couldn't agree with this more. You've articulated what many of us out here feel uneasy about.
Thanks much.
Mary Baker Eddy speaks in Prose Works somewhere of God as the most adorable, yet most unadored. My words, not hers precisely. But this blog posting brings out how important it is that we adhere to Him.
I so enjoy your blogging. A pleasure reading something from a fellow Christian Scientist that is so well-presented.
Keep up the good work.
like your blog.
Excellent post, as usual. It's why I withdrew from MC membership and no longer subscribe to the NY Times.Too much danger of getting sucked into the vortex!
I second what AZ posted above. Do continue these splendid essays,Christian.
Love the way you put things. And that quote from the Bible, just perfect for what you were bringing out.
Like that part about us not having to curl up with just anyone who believes and practices the very opposite of what CS stands for.
Well said.
Enjoyed this a lot, and I trust you will keep right on speaking up when you feel you need to. You don't pull any punches and I say, hooray for you.
God bless you, blogger, for using your considerable abilities to keep this religion of ours pure.
Yes, excellent essay as usual. I'm sure the writer recalls some years back when the Journal ran an article, "How a Muslim Prays". To think that this would be in the official magazine of our Cause. Wrong, wrong, wrong!
Good website you've got going. Very alive.
Love the premise of this blog post, that we must adhere to God. Does He not make this clear in all the commandments we are given in the Holy Scriptures? And in the life of our dear Master? And in the life of our courageous Leader?
"...not to an ecumenical, hail-fellow-well-met bonhomie with other religions, no matter how compatible with or friendly toward Christian Science they may seem.", you wrote.
Yet that is precisely what the Mother Church's own committee is doing. See their ecumenical hob nob web site here:
http://tinyurl.com/32qzsed
Isn't that sweet? Just makes you want to be subservient to the "National Council of Churches". Doesn't it? Come on! Let's be one of the guys.
One thing -- one major thing -- that would help would be for Christian Scientists to know their own religion. Most of us fall back on "man is created in God's image and likeness" as a kneejerk response to just about everything. While it's true, what does it mean? What is an "image" and how does it differ from "likeness"? This is intended only as an example, my point being that we very seldom actually read S&H as a book, but rather cherry-pick from it and the Bible for cheery maxims that do little more than provide a momentary fix. If we did read S&H for the whole sweep of its arguments, we might then be forced to understand mainline Christian theologies and so might be equipped to converse with the NCC. As it is, to judge from their lectures and writings, the individuals named in the blog Anonymous cites as the delegates or observers would be eaten alive in all-out discussion (can't say debate, as the Manual forbids it, Art X.1).
YES!!!
Thank you so much for this thoughtful and intelligent post. It is so necessary to keep speaking the Truth when the Dragon seems to be lurking right in the MC and voicing against Christian Science.
Post a Comment