tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46050424655988907842024-03-08T13:45:54.406-08:00The Broken Netthoughts, observations, and apercus on the study and daily living of christian scienceUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger204125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-85178752692378148362010-10-25T14:05:00.000-07:002010-10-25T14:15:27.074-07:00Turning To A New PageIt came to me vividly in the middle of the night that the previous entry was an embarrassing miscue. I was going to delete it and scurry off in shame, but decided to leave it as a stern and pointed rebuke to misplaced priorities. Had I been listening more closely to God I would not have written so carelessly and hastily on the wind.<br /><br />Wisdom and duty now dictate that future entries become occasional, i.e., only when there is a compelling need to say something. I realize this change will greatly reduce or even eliminate readers, but increased attention to my duty to God, to my Leader, and to mankind is the thing that is most needful now and is an activity which should bless others as well.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com37tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-59699344030141059722010-10-24T13:41:00.000-07:002010-10-24T14:38:52.515-07:00Enchanted, But Let's Hope Not EnchanteEvery child receives over the years an education of some kind. The few and fortunate are those who grow up steeped in Christian Science. Many get the traditional pedagogy of school and home, some dehumanizing tutelage in various Dickensian Dotheboys Halls (Wackford Squeers, Prop.), while still others are abandoned to the messy hurly-burly of OJT in the ways of all flesh. Only the schoolroom of pure Christianity will lead assuredly to a happy ending.<br /><br />Plato writes in "The Republic" (Jowett translation): "Everything that deceives may be said to enchant." I wonder if some apathetic souls among us are not betimes a trifle jaded with animal magnetism and even aggressive mental suggestion, seeing them as persistently cranky and irritating, stoically resigned to their presence as members of their mental families, but not opposing vigorously, as they should, these errors and their vile offspring with all the strength of Spirit they possess. Bruno Bettelheim makes some interesting points in the Introduction to his book "The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales": "If we hope to live not just from moment to moment, but in true consciousness of our existence, then our greatest need and most difficult achievement is to find meaning in our lives. It is well known how many have lost the will to live, and have stopped trying, because such meaning has evaded them." And further: "To find deeper meaning, one must become able to transcend the narrow confines of a self-centered existence and believe that one will make a significant contribution to life--if not right now, then at some future time. This feeling is necessary if a person is to be saatisfied with himself and what he is doing." And: "Since the child at very moment of his life is exposed to the society in which he lives, he will certainly learn to cope with its conditions, provided his inner resources permit him to do so. [new para.] Just because his life is often bewildering to him, the child needs even more to be given the chance to understand himself in this complex world with which he must learn to cope."<br /><br />Obviously Bettelheim is approaching the human experience from a wholly material standpoint, one which has nothing in common with Christian Science and sees the enchantment of fairy tales as an aid in personal development, but knowing this does not free one from the influence of this generally accepted view of man. Bettelheim's Freudian psychology may be passe these days, but its replacement is just as materialistic and must be rejected if one is to demonstrate Christian Science. False education is an incubus which cannot be flicked off casually from a mental lapel like a speck of dirt.<br /><br />Mary Baker Eddy writes in "Science and Health" (p. 62): "The entire education of children should be such as to form habits of obedience to the moral and spiritual law, with which the child can meet and master the belief in so-called physical laws, a belief which breeds disease." Many adults would also benefit from a rigorous re-education along those lines. Those who missed the opportunity and blessing of a thorough Christian education are certainly not comdemned to an eternal limbo, but it is going to require some serious scrubbing of mental abodes and the application of liberal doses of strong spiritual disinfectant to put things right. The echantments of mortal mind may seem harmless at times, even, well, enchanting, but they are never so and must be rooted out mercilessly and destroyed like the noxious weeds they are.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-65420826357152145112010-10-20T13:34:00.000-07:002010-10-20T14:16:07.575-07:00Let Them Eat CakeA four-page document titled "Alert", whose source was not identified but which is probably evident to many, was passed along to me. It bears the sad tidings that on September 10 Reading Rooms were notified that the "Complete Concordance to the Writings of Mary Baker Eddy" was no longer available in print and would not be reprinted. "Let them eat cake [Concord]" is their apparent--and it would seem cowardly delivered--message. The "Alert" mailing makes a very strong case for the inexcusableness of this action, as if a case needed to be made at all, though the Board is obviously deaf to concerns from a few hidebound fuddy-duddies.<br /><br />The Concordance was a superhuman undertaking, a humblingly selfless labor of love by Albert Conant, for which no sincere Christian Scientist can be too grateful. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't you think the Church would do everything it took to keep this indispensable work available in print even for those who feel as if they are being stigmatized as quaint Neanderthals for still studying Christian Science in books? Perhaps some helpful reader can explain to me why the BOD can easily find $750,000,000 to sqaunder on the Monitor television boondoggle and another $50,000,000 give or take (as I recall) to blow on the more recent white elephant and ongoing financial sinkhole, yet can't lay their hands on the insignificant few thousands it would take to keep the "Complete Concordance to the Writings of Mary Baker Eddy" in print. I was always under the strong impression that sedulous, prayerful study and pondering of the writings of Mrs. Eddy was of more than passing importance in gaining an increased understanding of Christian Science and that if they never did anything else the Board would want to do all they could to make this possible, but it seems that when the intoxicating vista of a real estate empire beckoned, it was even harder than usual for Mrs. Eddy to get their enraptured attention from her place in the rumble seat.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-49807468443924479302010-10-14T13:38:00.000-07:002010-10-14T14:40:12.691-07:00"King Christ, this world is all aleak"--e.e. cummingsAs part of a recent religion in America report on the evening news a reporter stopped a placid looking middle-aged man who had apparently just stepped out of the church where he had attended mass. He was thrown a sissy pitch and asked to name the first four books of the New Testament. Sad to say, instead of knocking that one confidently out of the park he whiffed--whiffed! From his reaction to the question, nonplussed silence, one might have thought he had been asked to state and prove on the spot Fermat's last theorem. Studies may show America to be one of the most "religious" nations on the planet, but "religious" seems to be a Brobdingnagian garment commodious enough to fit any wearer who chooses to mark X in the box which asks him if he is religious.<br /><br /><br />Unfortunately, many religions, churches, and assorted Elmer Gantrys lick their chops at the prospect of a flock of these obedient, unquestioning, and pliable sheep who seem to welcome with relief being led around by the nose (and don't mind paying for the privilege) by any Pooh-Bah with a rope an a will. For far too many it is a comfort to turn over the burdensome task of serious study, thought, and prayer to someone else, and there never seems to be a shortage of someone elses. It was to better than many among us to whom Christ Jesus spoke when he said, no doubt with a leaden heart: "Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners."<br /><br /><br />Once again I hope I am not alone in finding the final section of this week's lesson, "Doctrine of Atonement", distasteful and unsettling. To end the lesson with Jesus nailed to the cross could only appeal to those who would delight in hearing the chant, as the curtain drops, of the gloomily doleful "Stabat Mater dolorosa" as they kneel reverently before a crucifix, trembling in ecstasy like "St. Theresa in her wild lament". If that horrific closing tableau in this week's lesson doesn't give any Christian Scientist worthy of the name at least a twinge of the heebie-jeebies I don't know what would. "St. Paul said: 'For I am determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.' (I Cor ii 2) Christian Science says: I am determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him glorified." (S&H 200: 25-29)<br /><br /><br />If you think this is really nitpicking at the bottom of the barrel please fire at will, i.e., affix a gently reproving comment. If the sap is beginning to run a bit thin here I can always find something else to do with my time.<br /><br />Note: In reference to the note posted a day later to the second entry before this one, I have rechecked and find that in the November 15-21 lesson John 5: 7 is not included, but the more objectionable John 5: 4 is.<br /><br />The 200 in the previous entry is an acknowledgment that it was the 200th entry in this blog.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com22tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-69547823617797284482010-10-08T13:48:00.000-07:002010-10-08T13:58:14.367-07:00200Lines at 200<br /><br /> a nosegay for those who have patiently waited<br /><br /><br />Old seems are unrelieved by discord's strain.<br />The fish are reft which nets fail to contain.<br />False threadbare tares await the Fisher's touch<br />That tuneless strings made whole may sing and clutch.<br />'Tis not enough to ply the prayerful seine.<br />Dear Christ must point the way and mind maintain<br />So nothing's lost that He has giv'n a place<br />And broken thoughts are healed by Love's pure grace.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-83114832264871609252010-10-04T13:44:00.000-07:002010-10-05T11:21:43.484-07:00A Dirty Thumb On The Bible Lesson Scales? --W/NI cannot escape the nagging suspicion that something is at least a touch rotten in the Denmark of Bible lessons. I sense a nefarious tampering with the lessons over many years by hidden hands, sometimes conspicuous, at other times subtle, but still "darkness visible". No loyal Christian Scientist can deny the importance of the Bible lessons. Mrs. Eddy writes on page 31 of the Church Manual of "the Sunday lesson,--a lesson on which the prosperity of Christian Science largely depends."<br /><br />Here are three specifics. One is in Section 4 of this past week's lesson, "Unreality", where Jesus spits on the eyes of the blind man (Mark 8: 22-25). Another is the similar instance where Jesus makes clay of the spittle and puts it on a blind man's eyes (John 9: 1-9), a healing which is used in the lesson of November 8-14, "Mortals and Immortals". The third is the healing at the pool of Bethesda (John 9: 1-7), which appears in the very next lesson, November 15-21, "Soul and Body". In my experience at least, these healings reoccur in lessons with what I believe to be suspicious and insidious regularity. In the current Quarterly all three are used in fewer than two months.<br /><br />Well, so what? one may think. I would suggest that to give these healings unwarranted emphasis could suggest, misleadingly of course, that there is in Christian Science an openness to material aids in healing (i.e., medicine) or that there are other equally valid means of healing, as at the pool of Bethesda and that, ergo, Christian Science is just another gawky kid on the crowded healing block. Other questionable tamperings could also be cited.<br /><br />Some will simply classify these assertions as the demented ravings of a paranoid kook, but once obvious misues of the Bible lesson have been perpetrated, e.g., Woman's Year shenanigans, how can a now compromised spring ever again be trusted to issue uncontaminated waters? If there is any truth to these assertions it makes it all the more important that one study the Bible lessons from the books in order to read the citations in their contexts and observe or fill in any puzzling omissions. Even if the above is hooey, though I'm confident it is not, it is also important that Scientists be <em>studying</em> on their own, beyond the Bible lessons, the Bible and writings of Mary Baker Eddy. How, by the way, does one study a pamphletized Bible lesson?<br /><br />It has also been reported or rumored that in the fairly recent past some Bible lesson committee members were not even Christian Scientists. Pure baloney? Write the Board and ask them to assure you unequivocally that over the past 20-25 years--under their watch and their immediate predecessors' watch let's say--that every member of the Bible lesson committee has been a long-standing, well-seasoned, class-taught member of the Mother Church. That shouldn't be difficult to attest to if there are no skeletons in the closet. Don't hold your breath waiting for a reply.<br /><br />Note: I noticed after this entry was posted that in the Bible Lesson-Sermon for 2 October 1898, "Are Sin, Disease, and Death Real?", that the healing at the pool of Bethesda (John 5: 1-9) was, coincidentally, one of two healings in that lesson, the other being the healing of the woman "diseased with an issue of blood" (Matt 9: 20-22) for those who might be curious. What is much more notable, however, about the 1898 use of that healing in John (referred to in the above entry) is that verses 4 and 7 are omitted, thus ignoring the healing powers believed by many to be present in the waters when they were troubled. The healing focuses entirely, therefore, on Christ Jesus' unambiguous spiritual healing of the man "which had an infirmity thirty and eight years." It would therefore seem logical that if spiritual healing were the sole focus of healing in the Bible lessons, and why wouldn't it be?, that verses 4 and 7 would be eliminated in this week's official lesson. As I said at the beginning of this entry, I have some nagging suspicions about the purity of current Bible lessons.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-26506299860778403472010-09-30T13:49:00.000-07:002010-09-30T14:29:18.601-07:00On Defense (And Dithyrambs)I was brought up short once again by an article by Mortimer Carr (otherwise unknown to me) in the May 1946 Journal, "Protection and Defense". Perhaps I alone have too often let my mind drop into a rut when attempting to do my duty as required in Article VIII, Sect. 6, "Alertness to Duty", in the Church Manual. Mrs. Eddy there demands, in fact, that each member of the Mother Church "defend himself daily". It was easy for me to interpret this as donning, or at least clattering around vigorously with, an armor of truths daily. Somewhat to my chagrin--well, ok, a lot to my chagrin--Mr. Carr points out that would be protecting, not defending, myself.<br /><br />He quotes "a dictionary" which states: "the inmates of a fortress are defended by its guns, protected by its walls, and guarded by sentries against surprise." Hosing ourselves down daily with a shower of the letter isn't defending ourselves daily against aggressive mental suggestion. I find the definition of defend in the Students Reference Dictionary (unfortunately no longer available, it seems, from The Bookmark or anywhere else) stronger than those in my desk dictionary. It (SRD) reads, in part, for defend: "To drive from; to thrust back; hence, to deny; to repel a demand, charge, or accusation; to oppose; to resist . . . . To drive back a foe or danger . . . . . To secure against attacks or evil; to fortify against danger or violence . . . . " One certainly doesn't do that with a feather duster of words or a sprinkling of politive thoughts.<br /><br />Protection is defined, in part, from the SRD: "shelter from evil, preservation from loss, injury, or annoyance . . . How little are men disposed to acknowledge divine <em>protection</em>. That which protects or preserves from injury."<br /><br />This article of the Church Manual is much too important to handle with butterfingered notions of what the word defend means, and Mrs. Eddy tells us that each by-law in the Church Manual obeyed and lived will contribute to our growth in grace and worthiness to be called genuine Christian Scientists.<br /><br />Note: I am sorry if I keep giving the false impression that I do not want to write poems and post them here. To the reasons already given for my seeming unwillingness, I would add that when I sit down pen in hand to listen to the inspired whisperings of Euterpe or Polyhymnia I become instead a Quasimodo tormented not by "the bells, the bells", but those legions of cherished verses which come crowding in with their mellifluous elbows flying. It is too easy in such circumstances to end up with a poetic bricolage or pastiche, which I obviously do not desire. Then there is Shakespeare in all his overwhelming glory.<br /><br />Finally, as to the cryptic, probably Chinese, "comments" I know not what, whence, or to where.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-16376607376673256722010-09-28T13:53:00.000-07:002010-09-28T14:37:50.994-07:00Culprits, Correction, and CoiffuresOne culprit that can send the healing process into seemingly endless and unnecessary innings or overtimes is a misapprehension of what it is that needs healing. One cruelly puckish aggressive mental suggestion of mortal mind is the red herring that it should even be obvious to a dolt that it is matter that needs healing when the body is in revolt, whereas we learn in Christian Science that it should be plain to a Mortimer Snerd that there is no something in nothing (matter) eligible for healing despite a seemingly vivid, but vacuous, melee of affliction.<br /><br />An eraser does not correct a botched computation. Computation and correction are mental processes, which may be expressed on a sheet of paper, but those visible numbers, correct or incorrect, are not realities. It is always wrong thinking that needs correcting, i.e., healing, not sensory evidence. An errantly directed pencil point (I know, nobody uses pencils any more, but work with me on this, as Ross Perot used to say) is innocent as a newborn babe, though the flawed human thought guiding it via the hand is not and needs to profit from the salutary effects of the operation of the Christ, Truth, in consciousness.<br /><br />Corner cutters should not, moreover, delude themselves that a superficial mental combover, outre or otherwise, will "beat the devil", notwithstanding Mr. Trump's bravura coiffure.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-14978325555509578962010-09-21T14:00:00.000-07:002010-09-21T14:43:35.828-07:00Escaping Error's Euroclydon ExperiencesSometimes just remaining afloat on the turbulent ocean of material existence is a victory and cause for rejoicing, but eventually a vigorous effort will need to be made to get to the shore and the "Rock of Ages . . . Safe above life's raging sea." (Hymns 293-95) Some humble, receptive students of Christian Science may surf in on a wave hanging ten, if that's the correct term, with maddening ease while others may flounder and half drown for a time before being cast up like grateful Jonahs upon "Life's shore".<br /><br />One way to speed up the journey to the beach is to begin thinking much more deeply and prayerfully about every word and sentence in Science and Health. Mary Baker Eddy's rich and precise vocabulary was not a prideful display of erudition. She knew the difficulty of expressing pure metaphysics and Science in human language and therefore chose her words with the inspired foresight and exactness necessary to permit the spiritual sense thereof to be revealed to the diligent and receptive student. A failure to properly discern these shades of meaning and let them lead one on in their "kindly Light" may leave him adrift on the frothy whitecaps of opaque or meaningless expressions and sentences.<br /><br />Another potential maelstrom awaiting the striving Scientist is the sometimes brazen, sometimes subtle, "vanity sizing" of a number of important standards and requirements, one of which was mentioned in a recent entry, and it doesn't take a green eyeshaded accountant to ferret out others. To allow oneself to be happily deceived into a false sense of security about the requirements of obedience and way-marks of real progress is to risk being abandoned on the becalmed and dispiriting waters of that "Ancient Marriner" of whom Coleridge wrote. "Water, water, every where,/ Nor any drop to drink."<br /><br />I cannot resist adding as a postscript those wonderful lines near the end of this great poem, which I have quoted before:<br /> He prayeth best who loveth best<br /> All things both great and small;<br /> For the dear God who loveth us,<br /> He made and loveth all.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-5467884343237677922010-09-15T13:51:00.000-07:002010-09-16T06:37:09.009-07:00A Note That BurgeonedAs I scribbled on diligently with what started as, if not a baby, an adolescent note I thought of Woody Allen and the instant pudding, or instant whatever it was, in "Sleeper", though I resisted the temptation to subdue it with a broom. Feel free to pass on by, welcome visitor, if you are now chary of the prospect.<br /><br />Some housekeeping matters. There have been a couple of recent requests--Supporter (Southwest) and Anonymous (I think)--for some personal healings. I feel it wise at present to keep this blog as impersonal as possible and not draw what would possibly be undesirable attention to me. I also do not wish to chance that anything in this blog would be post- or pre-validated or invalidated by some perception regarding or reaction to a healing. Additionally, I need to avoid any inadvertent disclosures which could jeopardize anonymity and loose from their kennels the salivating bloodhounds. Read instead the testimonies in the Sentinels and Journals of the 30's, 40's, and 50's. Some are staggering, humbling evidence of what God and even a limited understanding of Christian Science can do. This verbiage may seem a lot like an unconvincing song and dance response, but at present I feel it best to stick to my chosen last.<br /><br />The use in a comment to a previous entry of the word "demonstration" for "healing" deserves a comment of its own. By a timely coincidence I recently read a first-rate article in the June 1945 Journal by Emma Easton Newman, CSD, "To Demonstrate 'This Living Vine'". She writes: "However, some of the testifiers [at Wednesday evening meetings], not yet versed in the true and spiritual meaning of demonstration, speak of physical improvement, or an increase in salary, or the obtaining of a house, or some other human objective, as a demonstration. . . . If we ask ourselves, Am I demonstrating the 'living Vine', the Christ? we shall use the word 'demonstration' less frequently, but more accurately. It is impossible to assert the nonexistence of matter and material projects and recognize that the mortal, the material, the carnal mind is a dream, utterly unreal, and then expct to demonstrate or prove anything in this dream. We demonstrate our at-one-ment with God through claiming and utilizing the Mind of Christ." Further on she continues: "He [the student of Christian Science] needs to be shown that his necessity is to demonstrate his oneness with the Father, to demonstrate divine Principle, Life, and Love, to demonstrate life in Christ. He sometimes thinks of the healing that is the fruitage of demonstration as being the demonstration itself, whereas the higher meaning of demonstration is the fuller realization of the Christ, Truth." My trusty Student's Reference Dictionary gives, in part, this definition of demonstrate: "To show and prove to be certain; to prove beyond the possibility of doubt". This exerpt from Mrs. Newman's excellent article, which needs to be read in full, does not do it justice.<br /><br />I have hemmed and hawed before on requests for poetry. For me, poetry is not motivated by a desire or need to put an arrow in a bull's eye, i.e., to make a point. It comes more from spontaneous inspiration (though that might be a self-flattering word to use) and can eat up scads of valuable time. Additionally, I think I detect that many kind readers of this blog are not irresistibly drawn to the sunlight dappled glades and dells of poesy. This isn't a "No and don't bring up the subject again", but rather to say that as time and the sputtering fires of the muse permit, we'll see.<br /><br />Finally, I noticed after my last entry that I was not alone with limpets, not Georgia, on my mind.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-28134454126837725722010-09-12T13:28:00.000-07:002010-09-12T14:09:53.546-07:00Adhering To Our Jealous Father-Mother GodTo 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".<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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")Unknownnoreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-53910238149675228412010-09-06T13:30:00.000-07:002010-09-06T14:19:40.781-07:00Department Of Amplification (Q And A Desk)Question. You keep repeating like jungle drums that some sinister influence is, and has been for years, slowly and surreptitiously insinuating itself into the Church and the consciences of many of its members, but what evidence do you offer that such an alarming activity is actually taking place?<br /><br />Answer: I'm glad you asked. The most vicious argument many Christian Scientists are being subjected to--and in unguarded moments submitting to--is that Christian Science does not heal, or if it does it takes more time to reach a conclusion than "Lost" did and one that isn't any more satisfying. The inspired "Christian Science Standard of Healing", which originally appeared in the November 1957 Journal and oft reprinted, was given a sellout Ken and Barbie makeover in tweedledum and tweedledee versions, though tweedledum, or was it tweedledee, was hastily sent to detention for bad behavior, i.e., for still asking too much of what was already much too little. Those who found the original 1957 V-12 engine too souped-up and demanding for their limited metaphysical budgets got as a response to their complaints a sporty 4-cylinder put-put that promised all the power and performance of the 1957 model without its onerous "costs".<br /><br />The apostate notion that Christian Science is just another mind/body healing system securely corseted in the bone stays of musty Victorian rules unfortunately seems to have gained footing. Christian Science is not some spinster wallflower at the mind/body healing cotillion, nor is it like the child's game of tiddlywinks, where only he who somehow gets the most prayer chips in the cup gets the healing, like a winner at the pool of Bethesda.<br /><br />There has also been, I believe, a subtle and very harmful effort for years to wean Scientists away from their textbooks and encourage them to venture into an up-with-the-times Brave New World and its soma of contextless exerpts. Without limpet-like adherence to the Bible and writings of Mary Baker Eddy, Christian Scientists could allow Science to disappear for a time or lapse into obscurity.<br /><br />Then there are the recently discussed attempts to relegate Mrs. Eddy, our Leader, and her superannuated Church Manual to the rumble seat of the Mother Church roadster, where they can ride along out of sight and out of mind. And kudos to the Gill book, which was a terrific opening kickoff in this ongoing enterprise.<br /><br />Several other unfortunate "progressive" initiatives could be added, but space does not permit, and they have been highlighted in many previous entries.<br /><br />Question. I'm tired of all that cat and mouse about who the villian is and what the clue is in that dopey poemlet. Is it Mr. Plum with the pipe wrench in the conservatory or who or what?<br /><br />Answer. Remove the indentation of lines 2 and 4 and align them to the left with lines 1 and 3. I don't surrender easily--but neither does the Adversary alluded to.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-86765374716013605902010-09-02T13:40:00.000-07:002010-09-02T14:43:34.192-07:00"The only incentive of a mistaken sense . . . .""The only incentive of a mistaken sense is malicious animal magnetism,--the name of all evil,--and this must be understood." (My 357: 8-10) Incentive: "That which kindles or inflames; . . . That which moves the mind or operates on the passions; that which incites or has a tendency to incite to determination or action; that which prompts to good or ill; motive; spur." (SRD)<br /><br />I apologize to those of you who have grown weary of the subject discussed, however briefly, in the past few entries, but I am more convinced than ever that Christian Scientists ignore it at their peril. However, one's weariness with the topic could be an indication of the secret and invisible influence of this malicious opiate. If you are a loyal, pure, sincere, and diligent student of Christian Science who is unreservedly loyal to Christ Jesus, Mary Baker Eddy, and the Church Manual this malignant evil wants you out of the way, as in, not to put too blunt a point on it, dead, or at least mentally dead. If one is not most watchful and wise he could very well find himself serving unconsciously an error which he would not dream of serving consciously. Color me barmy if you wish, but post a double watch just in case.<br /><br />There is a sentence relevant to this ongoing monologue, with feedback of course, in Miscellany which is so short--and pungent--that it can easily be overlooked in a distracted blink of an eye. "That error is most forcible which is least distinct to conscience." (My 197: 2-4) Exerpts from the Student's Reference Dictionary (SRD) definitions of two words in that sentence show something of the depth and importance of that simple statement. Forcible: "Powerful; strong; mighty. Violent. Efficacious; active. . . . acting with force; impressive." Conscience: "Internal or self-knowledge, or judgment of right and wrong; or the faculty, power, or principle within us, which decides on the lawfulness or unlawfulness of our own actions and affections, and instantly approves or condemns them. . . . Conscience is called by some writers, the 'moral sense' . . . ." As I write this I have not had time to check if any commenters to the previous, and doubtless thoroughly intriguing, entry found my trifle there thought provoking. It has been said that every tub must stand on its own bottom, but if the corrosive effects of stealthy, insinuating aggressive mental suggestion has eaten it out one's present condition could be far dicier than he supposes.<br /><br />Note: Have read comments to the previous entry. I appreciate the interest in the poemlet, but I think I overstated the clue's running through it. The little verse is really a stalking-horse of sorts for four carefully placed bread crumbs. Though as I said before, I may be in the minority feeling they lead to a credible threat, but don't be too quick to say it isn't.<br />A friend (Southwest) gave a pretty good summary of the source of this blog's title, which really goes back to the New Testament, of course. I would say the title has relevance individuals as well as to the movement as a whole.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-24991628919112624992010-08-27T13:54:00.000-07:002010-08-27T14:27:35.865-07:00A Poetic Bonbon For Tolerant SleuthsLike a dog with a favorite bone, I would like to gnaw a bit longer on the primary subject of the last two entries. I alluded long ago to what I perceive to be the chief perpetrator of malicious mental attacks against the Christian Science Church and Christian Scientists. I have whipped up a hasty, and probably tasteless, confection in which lies an unambiguous clue to the source I sense of the evil. Of course, I could be as misdirected as Wrong-Way Corrigan (I hope I am not going to get thrown for a big loss on the name.), but I have sound reasons, sound to me at any rate, for my convictions. If I am correct or on a valid scent it is not a threat to be, or to have been, frivolously dismissed. Why not just come out with it and quit playing games? Every playful and silly dog must have his romp I guess, or perhaps to give the fortunate readers of this entry the thrill of a chase or a chance to wrestle with, or at least kick around, their own suspicions, assuming they have any--or care at all about this Sherlockian enterprise.<br /><br /> A lidless stare, the serpent does not blink.<br /> Mit schlag of Christly seemingness, it lies.<br /> Do servants watch and scour each hidden chink?<br /> Get wise to secret snares and crush these spies.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com18tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-27525514274846269182010-08-25T13:42:00.000-07:002010-08-25T14:31:56.505-07:00Scotching Satan's Serpentine SeductionsMrs. Eddy tells us that the nothingness of nothing is plain, but nowhere that I recall does she say, or even imply, that the subtlety of subtlety is plain. Would that it were. It is the nature of the beast, animal magnetism, to anesthetize consciousness, in somewhat the pernicious way carbon monoxide acts--silent, odorless, and unseen. Thus the necessity that our watch be wakeful, spiritually active, and imbued with a keen sensitivity to anything that is unlike God, which of course means we had better be well acquainted with Him. Other things than gentle lambs come in lamb's clothing.<br /><br /><br />If the old westerns are to be believed, one of the tricks employed by Indians attacking a circled wagon train was to hang off the side of their horses on the side away from the beleaguered defenders so that only a horse was visible to them. The Indians would then shoot either under the neck or over the back. (That paleface's speaking with forked tongue--or worse, much worse--invited retaliation, is beside the point here.) A horse is all mortal mind, animal magnetism, wants us to see.<br /><br />Mrs. Eddy sounded the tocsin repeatedly in her writings on the dangers of a flaccid sentinel. In addition to the quote in the previous entry there is the well-known citation on page 442 of Science and Health, lines 30-32, and page 114 of Miscellaneous Writings, lines 21-26. It should also be remembered that a sentry or porter is posted at the front door, not the bedroom door or closet door. The discovery of an intruding evil in the act of ransacking our mental drawers or snuggling up with us in bed is not the ideal time or place to deal with it, though we grow from those kinds of experiences too.<br /><br />After my last posting I thought about Mrs Eddy's unexpected, to me, choice of the word "criminal" in the quote from Science and Health used. The Student's Reference Dictionary has, in part, this definition of criminal (noun): "a violator of law, divine or human." And, in part, from criminal (adjective): "That violates moral obligation; wicked." Our in-baskets need to be constantly subjected to diligent scrutiny, else we too might be wondering like King George III how the devil that apple got in our dumpling.<br /><br />Note: "'Reeling and Writhing, of course, to begin with,' the Mock Turtle replied, 'and the different branches of Arithmetic--Ambition, Distraction, Uglification, and Derision.'" (Lewis Carroll, from "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-1468201229529973952010-08-21T13:48:00.000-07:002010-08-21T14:46:00.332-07:00"Let no man deceive you by any means"Beware the Jabberwok, my son!<br /> The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!<br /> (Lewis Carroll)<br /><br />The danger is more immediate , more malicious, more persistent, and more subtle than many of us suspect. Our unleashed minds relax and wander aimlessly through gardens of earthly delights, heedless of the vipers lurking patient and unseen, ready to strike. The skulking mental assassin, the shameless stooge, the self-righteous and unprincipled toady, the selfish, cutthroat opportunist--those who wittingly and unwittingly serve the Prince of Darkness in the name of God--they all lie waiting in ambush for the unwary, faithful, and dedicated Christian Scientist. It is probably no accident that I am currently reading Shakespeare's "Richard III", who is the very model of the smooth-tongued villain.<br /><br />Rushing in where an angel would fear to tread, I have made missteps, which I have tried to acknowledge. The poet Theodore Roethke has a lovely line, which I hope I quote correctly: "I learn by going where I have to go." One is not obligated to chain himself sine die to past indiscretions and excesses. To the contrary.<br /><br />It was not mere coincidence that I turned this week to the Bible Lesson of 20 November 1898, then called "Ancient and Modern Necromancy; or, Mesmerism and Hypnotism". It is a powerful lesson, taking for its Golden Text and Responsive Reading (and I the title of this entry) II Thessalonians 2: 1-13. It was as if God had laid a necessary feast before me saying "Read and Heed!"<br /><br />Two malignant influences are, I feel, at the bottom of what is going on sub rosa. One is a disgusting, disloyal attempt which has been going on for many years until it now pervades the entire Church and its branches, all of it cynically masked by a thick fog of sophistry, to discredit and demean Mary Baker Eddy and question, downplay, and erode her place as Leader, now and always.<br /><br />The other pernicious influence, also long-standing and pervasive, I will leave nameless, like the yet undiscovered melody which Elgar said runs through his "Enigma Variations". I have alluded to it almost from the outset of this blog. The name 666 will do for the nonce. At the risk of being accused of effrontery I humbly admonish all loyal Christian Scientists not to ignore either of these issues. "So secret are the present methods of animal magnetism that they ensnare the age into indolence, and produce the very apathy on the subject which the criminal desires." (S&H 102: 20-23)<br /><br />Finally, a more personal issue. Accusations of vituperation and logomachy, just and unjust, come with the territory, but the snarky and mean-spirited characterization of kind comments made on this blog as fawning adulation is crass and uncalled-for. In the Bond movie "For Your Eyes Only", I think, the faux-contessa says "Me nightie's slipping." Something has slipped somewhere else as well, but what has been revealed this time isn't pulchritude, but smacks of the venomous spume of jealousy and resentment. I have never in any of my 185+ entries angled for flattering comments or for comments of any kind, nor have I ever suggested my example was a brightly-shining star to which lesser mortals should be eternally grateful to hitch their humble wagons. I appreciate all sincere, kind comments as well as sincere but less kind ones. I have profited from both. Only an unchristian churl would find something to sneer at in that.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com25tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-39684862503310227452010-08-19T13:44:00.000-07:002010-08-19T14:21:58.582-07:00BeguiledSerpent. Yo toots! I saw you taking a gander at the fruit on this handsome tree. Words can't describe how good and the sweet the fruit is. You need to taste it for yourself.<br />Eve. He said we weren't even supposed to touch it, but it's sure yummy to look at. I'll give you that.<br />S. Why would He put it there if you weren't meant to nosh on it? He may have gotten bored and wanted to test your reaction to my complimentary schmoozing and chipper talking up.<br />E. Yes, and maybe there is good and then there is GOOD, and just maybe that fruit is only a tempting knockoff sort of good, something to appeal to "channels of sense, intellect, and aspirations". [Dummelow via time warp]<br />S. Sweetie, the fruit on this tree has more delights than a Swiss army knife. Talk about good! You can whip up a fruit salad from this tree that would be the envy of a platoon of North Korean generals. Look at some of these endorsements: "Lip smackin' good", "So sweet and good you'll think you're on a date with Elvis", "More gorgeous than Gorgeous George", and "Grrrreat!" (from Tony the Tiger no less).<br />E. Well, I can't deny I get a goose-bumpy tingle when I look at that tree, and every coruscating fruit has, I see, a little seal of approval from someone (in microscopic print). Still, He said don't think about touching it.<br />S. Pshaw! Quit being such a dweeb. With an attitude like that you'll never get invited to a wingding or chosen to be a Bachelorette. Maybe the Lord God only said "Hands Off" until He could open a Walmart and you and that palooka over there could rustle up some duds to cover up the petty annoyance of guilt and shame.<br />E. Guilt? Shame?<br />S. Bon appetit!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-80081336619462156792010-08-15T13:34:00.000-07:002010-08-15T14:09:58.651-07:00Getting The Lead, And The Apple, OutThe independently owned and operated Tophets we endure from time to time, or even more or less constantly, are there by invitation only, invitations hurried along, no doubt, by fear or befuddled wonderment at mortal mind's many kaleidoscopic spectacles and seamy sideshows.<br /><br />There are probably times when we wonder, like King George III of England when confronted with an apple dumpling, "how, how the devil got the apple in?" [His fluency in English was never a strong suit.] ("Historic Side-Lights", Howard Payson Arnold) If the porters at the door of our consciousnesses are snoozing instead of watching we are going to be admitting a sinister gallimaufry of undeveloped negatives (in more senses than one). Once past the dozing porters they go to our mental dark rooms, where they are developed (again, possibly in more senses than one) and then "voila" [sorry about the missing accent grave, LowlyWise] or, more precisely, "quelle horreur!" Some are even sent to the enlarger, and the Gulliver's disgust at the sight of the Brobdingnagians is small beer compared to those enlarged and unwelcome horrors. By then, however, mortal mind has run up its Jolly Roger and we bitterly rue our failure to post a diligent watch.<br /><br />The rudely awakened or startled student of Christian Science may be tempted at such a juncture to "floor it", to flee in a squeel of smoking tires from the pestilential Blackbeard (I know, he was a pirate, not a NASCAR driver.) , after the manner of the person Stephen Leacock describes who "flung himself upon his horse and rode madly off in all directions", but sedulous, consecrated, and patient study and prayer are needed, not a frantic Nathan's Famous gorging to make up for lost time. Better to post a dedicated doorman and then add a solid plank a day to our bridge from matter to Spirit than be forced to attempt a leap in unsure, unseemly, and Skivvied hasted over the frightful chasm we ourselves have occasioned.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com18tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-7247539921417165582010-08-08T13:59:00.000-07:002010-08-08T14:51:28.542-07:00"Simplify, simplify.""Our life is frittered away by detail. . . . Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity! I say, let your affairs be as two or three, and not a hundred or a thousand; instead of a million count half a dozen, and keep your accounts on your thumbnail. . . . Simplify, simplify." (Henry David Thoreau, from <em>Walden</em>)<br /><br />Advice more relevant today than when he wrote it over 150 years ago. No reader would be poorer for the investment of time required to read Thoreau's major works. He is a magnificent and highly idiosyncratic thinker and writer, probably the finest America has produced.<br /><br />To return to my last from that brief obiter dictum, I will once again let another have the floor. (This approach to blogging could get to be a habit.) I was much impressed by an article in the Salvation Army's April 10 "War Cry", "Divine Interruption" by Whitney Von Lake Hopler. I don't have the space, or permission, to reprint the entire, fairly short, article, but here are the six simple points, plus one brief exerpt, she made.<br />1. Make yourself available for God's assignments.<br />2. Take time to actively listen for God's voice.<br />3. Focus on God's plans rather than your own.<br />4. Keep eternity in view. . . . Remember that not all urgent activities are important ones.<br />5. Pray for the grace to respond to people's needs with compassion instead of irritation.<br />6. Don't let fear stop you.<br /><br />"The War Cry" is published biweekly and is well worth $10 (yes $10) for one year, $19 for two years, or a whopping $28 for three years. If you are interested in subscribing call 1-800-SAL-ARMY. I don't think any Christian would find it money ill spent.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-87938093996242734422010-08-04T13:58:00.000-07:002010-08-04T14:42:26.139-07:00Sticking To Our GunsThere is something appealing, to a certain turn of mind at any rate, about the Stetsoned, two six-shootered gunslinger, squinting gimlet-eyed before him, face bronzed by years in scorching desert suns and chiseled by searing heat and wind-driven sand. Maybe the stump of an old cheroot clinched defiantly in his teeth. Ever alert and ready to take on any foe or confront any danger.<br /><br />All Scientists would do well to pack the two six-shooters of the Truth: the Bible and Science and Health. It is essential that Christian Scientists be ever alert to error and quick on the draw with these two powerful sources of inspiration and spiritual strength. The distaff reader may not find the initial picture appealing, with or without the cheroot, and this fanciful image is not meant to suggest that the gentler sex should become metaphysical Ma Barkers. Maybe Annie Oakleys. But we all need those two powerful sources of Truth, Life, and Love and must know how to use them instantly through a familiarity gained only by constant, daily "practice" therewith and humble, contrite prayer for increased understanding of God and His creation. It is the only way out of mortal mind and on and up to greater conscious unity with God.<br /><br />Greenhorn bravado and temerity will not long suffice for him (or her) armed only with the single six-shooter of daily exerpts from our textbooks. Such as they will ultimately discover there is as much fire power in one of those phony scripted smooches on "The Bachelorette" as in a foolish reliance on anything but the books, both whole books, and nothing but the books. We are told by Christ Jesus that we must know the Scriptures and by Mary Baker Eddy that we must study and ponder both. I know no way to follow these commands without constantly belting them on our hips, so to speak, i.e., keeping them always at our fingertips. And using them faithfully each day.<br /><br />Note: To Thanks Much, I think G&S and Big-endian were explained. I would add that the egg argument was over which end of the egg to eat from. It was meant to poke fun--and probably more. The Big-endians were Catholics and Little-endians Protestants, so I am told.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-7323649549044950592010-08-01T08:28:00.000-07:002010-08-01T09:05:38.002-07:00This and ThatCS Practitioner was wondering if Mrs. Eddy would use the internet. I think the responses from Helen and EJ were pretty much like mine. It is probably not likely that she wouldn't, but her refined spiritual sense of things might well see dangers invisible to me. I think one can safely assert, however, that she would not produce a reported vapidity like spirituality.com, if it still labors gamely on.<br /><br />The question leapfrogged two immensely important 20th Century media: radio and television. Who knows what use, if any, she would have made of them. Mary Baker Eddy is firmly and irrevocably rooted in the world of print, which has a permanence and solidity none of the others does--at least for me. I also think it is safe of say she would not have been a blogger. Where would she get the time? E-mails? Hmm. Facebook, Twitter, texting? I can't see it, but who knows, she might have become a maven of cyberspace.<br /><br />As some readers may already know, Ann Beals of The Bookmark has sent out an urgent plea for donations. For many, especially officials in Boston, she is about as popular as the idea of women in the priesthood is to the Pope. One may differ strongly with some of her metaphysics, but I for one would be loath to be without the wonderful writings she offers from the pens of Greenwood, Tutt, Wilcox, Simon, Seeley, et al., the Student's Dictionary, those splendid Bible Lessons from 1898-1910, etc. Most of the items she offers, whether regarded as a sheep or goat, are available nowhere else to my knowledge. I'm aware that for many The Bookmark is a very thorny issue, but I would rather feed on some honey-dew from Ms. Beals' Xanadu than choke down a desiccated and unappetizing snack from the CSPS vending machine. If one doesn't feel he can, or wish, to contribute he can perhaps consider getting anything of interest to him (or her) while the opportunity lasts. It might also help alleviate the financial need as well.<br /><br />Finally, the lovely closing lines to "Leaves of Grass" by the great American poet Walt Whitman. That most sensuous and materialistic of troubadours is speaking of himself, but I find the lines more touching if I think of them as coming from my heavenly Father-Mother God.<br /> Failing to fetch me at first keep encouraged,<br /> Missing me one place search another,<br /> I stop somewhere waiting for you.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com18tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-19088621952496029932010-07-29T13:55:00.000-07:002010-07-29T14:33:12.212-07:00Faith-Cure: All Hat And No CattleIt was reliably reported a number of years ago that a certain oh-so cutting edge--and fatuous--commissar of the Mother Church stated that Christian Science healing is just one of many, presumably equally valid, healing systems. This fetid pronouncement bubbled up like swamp gas from the miasma of those dark years from which the Church has yet to emerge, years when the Board was giddily infatuated with the mind/body goings-on at the Harvard Medical School and had enraptured visions, apparently, of being BMOC in that tangled scrum. It doesn't take a vivid imagination to envisage the dank metaphysical backwaters that lie along that muzzy metaphysical bayou. One scary creature lurking in those black lagoons is personality with a "big, big P", as G&S might put it.<br /><br />I recently encountered a fine article by Helen Wood Bauman in the March 1941 Journal, "Faith As A Factor In Healing", in which she cautions Scientists to be alert to the very important distinction between Christian Science healing and faith healing. Ms. Bauman gives a good summary of the dangers and limitations of faith healing, as does Mary Baker Eddy in "Retrospection and Introspection", "Faith-Cure" (pp. 54-55). The difference is, in the words of Mark Twain [I thought, but am unable to verify], as great as the difference between the lightning bug and lightning.<br /><br />Any seasoned and sincere Scientist should know the difference and unceremoniously reject any flavor of faith healing. It is the tyro in Christian Science who is most in danger and who might mistake the slather of comforting words and "tea and sympathy" for the genuine article. Indulged in, faith healing will of necessity have a stultifying effect on the metaphysical progress of any student or patient, as well as that of the wayward mental physician. It is perhaps possible that I have conjured up once again a grin without a cat, though Mrs.. Eddy and Ms. Bauman obviously saw more than an insignificant grin. The hasty and unwise elevation of some Ethelreds the Unready may have put at risk naive or unwary students of Christian Science. Toadyism, a faithless willingness to give C.S. treatment for those who continue to receive medical care, and unquestioning adherence to the Big-endianism of the day should not be the litmus tests for one's fitness for the practice or, a fortiori, for teaching.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-18641771637001190572010-07-24T13:55:00.000-07:002010-07-24T14:34:59.865-07:00Coming On Like GangbustersI have said as much before and still strongly believe that error, animal magnetism, mortal mind, evil--pick the label you prefer--needs to be oppoosed and denied far more energetically and imperatively than many of us seem to. "Press on, press on, ye sons of light,/Untiring in your holy fight,/Still treading each temptation down,/And battling for a brighter crown." (Hymn #290) Christ Jesus saw clearly the need for Satan's eradication and assured his followers that each of them can utilize the talent or talents he has been given. "Behold, I give you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy". (Luke 10: 19) A good pair of metaphysical hobnail boots will be necessary. This isn't delicate tweezer work, like building a ship in a bottle.<br /><br />Mary Baker Eddy implied that we live in "a world of sin and sensuality hastening to a greater development of power" (S&H 82: 31-32), and she wrote that over a century ago. Many of us might make greater progress if, instead of tepid, timorous, or torpid opposition to mortal mind, we followed Richard Sherman's (Tom Ewell) advice in "The Seven Year Itch" and came on like gangbusters, not, of course, with Rachmaninoff's "Second Piano Concerto", but with a greater and more vigorous understanding and demonstration of Christian Science. A failure to energetically crush out each temptation as it is encountered may leave the woolgathering treader-down with a discouragingly long--and growing longer--work order. Mrs. Eddy threw down the gauntlet emphatically to her loyal followers on a July 4 a century or so ago (Mis 176-177). How many of them (us?) are still dithering over picking it up and getting on with the challenge she was in fact requiring of them and us.<br /><br />What worked so well for the Montgolfier brothers over the streets of Paris way back when will not suffice today--not that it ever really did. Satan and his progeny stoke the fires of hell with unrealized good intentions and self-satisfying pronouncements masquerading as heartfelt prayers. "Do not go gentle into that good night,/. . . Rage, rage against the dying of the light." (from "Do not go gentle into that good night" by Dylan Thomas)<br /><br />Note: Ignes fatui is simply the plural of ignis fatuus, will-o'-the-wisp, something that misleads or deludes; an illusion.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-39102916488318251622010-07-18T13:26:00.000-07:002010-07-24T14:29:55.699-07:00Ignes Fatui Wisely DispelledWhen one realizes a piece of furniture in his mental home is ugly, uncomfortable, and tormenting it is time to remove it, not simply relegate it to the attic or give it a cursory, faute de mieux reupholstering. "If disease moves, mind, not matter, moves it; therefore be sure that you move it off." (S&H 419: 14-15) Not even a grin without the cat should be allowed to remain.<br /><br />Trying to cope foolishly with some mesmeric claim rather than peremptorily destroying or unlearning it is to play Br'er Rabbit to a mortal mind tar baby. Pope's observation on vice in his "Essay on Man" can just about as easily apply to any false belief or attraction.<br />Vice is a monster of so frightful mien,<br />As to be hated needs but to be seen;<br />Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,<br />We first endure, then pity, then embrace.<br /><br />Such an embrace may sell itself as a kind of moral squeeze play, but a bunt is never going to get the ball out of the park, and the truth that just might get across home plate if the play works won't compensate for the offending error's remaining ensconced. There is also the possibility of a discouraging double play if the bunt is whiffed or popped up. One may know intellectually that prayer isn't simply a General McClellan-like marshalling of spiritual ideas, but really "getting it" is the ineluctable understanding and demonstration of Truth and learning that what is seen as vale was never in fact ave.<br /><br />Note: If the above baseball metaphor leaves too many runners stranded on base (about five too many by my count), I hope at least the gist of the effort is clear. It's too late for another at-bat.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com18tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4605042465598890784.post-21535628523471144912010-07-10T13:50:00.000-07:002010-07-10T14:20:28.680-07:00"My mother is a fish."--VardamanThat well-known and startling statement is a complete "chapter" in William Faulkner's <em>As I Lay Dying</em>. It may only be a choice bit of Faulkner's gothic rhetoric, but it can be used to make a useful point, I think. If a child, like Vardaman, made such a perverted statement and one set out to correct it in Christian Science, he certainly wouldn't pray for a correct concept of a fish. To establish in Vardaman's thought the proper sense of a human mother wouldn't permanently or Scientifically correct anything either.<br /><br />The root of the animal magnetism, aggressive mental suggestion, claim, or temptation harrying one may lie much deeper than the tears and pain occasioned. "That which is least distinct to thought is most forcible." (My 197: 2-4) How many of us have a cherished or feared glass menagerie we keep enshrined on a shelf deep within the shadows of our false beliefs? For many (most?) of us only strict obedience to God and His laws and the absolute purity of thought the furnace of affliction brings will allow Science to get to all of it and destroy it. Mrs. Eddy tells us, though, that the warfare with oneself is grand and gives idle minds, and even busy ones, plenty to do. We certainly don't think our loving Father-Mother God is a fish--at least I hope not--but are there not too many times when our disobedient and apathetic "three-day" thoughts of Him begin to smell? As we break the bonds of mortal mind and its enslaving beliefs we might do well to sing in our dissolving chains "like the sea", though time should never be permitted to hold us "green and dying" as we do so. (See "Fern Hill" by Dylan Thomas)<br /><br />Note: I'm sorry if I appeared to take the commenter on brevity "to task". My comment was merely an explanatory comment thereon.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com17