Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Day 90: Idols

172:23 - 174:21

Mary Baker Eddy starts off this section with a question:

What is man?
Her formal answer to this question is in Recapitulation here.But, as she is still introducing the topic of physiology, she lists what man is not.

I marked this one first:

Neither the substance nor the manifestation of Spirit is obtainable through matter.
I marked it because I forget it, constantly. I forget it when I think I know best, when I cut myself while chopping vegetables, when I blow my nose again. I'm not trying to get to some zen state of meditation where the crap in my life is manageable.I'm trying to get above and beyond that so that the illusion of crap falls away and I have a higher sense of everything.

The next thing I marked was something I was trying to explain to my five-year old daughter yesterday. She picked out the little board book about the ten commandments. She doesn't normal do that so I was surprised. I was trying to make each commandment relevant. We got to the commandment about idols and I couldn't say anything that made sense.

Is civilization only a higher form of idolatry, that man should bow down to a flesh-brush, to flannels, to baths, diet, exercise, and air? Nothing save divine power is capable of doing so much for man as he can do for himself.
 The weird thing isn't that MBE wrote this, it's that she wrote it so long ago.We, as a civilization, progress slowly.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Day 89: The One and Only

170:22 - 172:22

The idea of these two pages is causation. What is the cause? Is man physical? Physical and spiritual?

The section I marked is

The fundamental error lies in the supposition that man is a material outgrowth and that the cognizance of good or evil, which he has through the bodily senses, constitutes his happiness or misery.
This made me think of the beginning/only idea by saying the 'fundamental error.'

I've never given evil much thought as a real idea or power but I've noticed it keeps coming up in movies, books, news. He's evil. Their evil. That's evil. It's so easy to be persuaded that God, good, Love doesn't exist in one person, or place. And if he doesn't exist there, maybe he doesn't exist here.



Monday, March 29, 2010

Day 88: One step forward, two back

168:30 - 170:21

Today's pages continue discussing physical symptoms versus spiritual harmony. This passage uses the word chemicalization which is a Christian Science term. Mary Baker Eddy defines it as:

the process which moral mind and and body undergo in the change of belief from a material to a spiritual basis.
I've heard variations of this definition used by other CSers. Some of the definitions sound a little froo-froo and some are completely off-base so it's important to note where the definition is that MBE used.

The first line I marked:

If we understood the control of Mind over the body, we should put no faith in material means. 

And then,

Only the action of Truth, Life, and Love can give harmony.
I've noticed in my own thinking that my understanding of the CS concepts I'm working on day by day tend to be a little too analytical. If I think a certain way, I will have a certain outcome. The change is more superficial than I want and I recognize it as a thought-system and not true Christian Science.

It's hard to watch my thinking, listen for spiritual insights, and tend to my daily duties. I'm not complaining, more explaining why my growth seems slow and, at times, stagnant. I want the easy answer. I would prefer to have a superficial ceremony, repeat a prayer, thank God and be changed. But that's not going to happen. And as an alternative short cut, I'm looking for a CS-ish system. Oddly, that puts mortal mind back in the driver's seat which is what I'm trying to rise above.

So in a lot of ways, I feel like I'm back to square one. I need to pour in more love.

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Day 87:

167:1 - 168:29

I've been thinking about yesterday's issue with impeding action.I can't get it out of my mind. Any thoughts?

Today's first section:

We apprehend Life in divine Science only as we live above corporeal sense and correct it. Our proportionate admission of the claims of good or of evil determines the harmony of our existence...
I've been doing a lot of correcting of my thought but, honestly, I'm lazy. This correcting is a habit that I'm not in so it takes work and things happen, like life. Then life gets off track and I have to start correcting again. It would be much easier if I already had this habit but making the habit is just as important as having the habit.

And then

Whatever influence you cast on the side of matter, you take away from Mind
I know people who meditate regularly and I wonder if they would just prefer to stay in that mental place, far away from the material.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Day 86: Physiology

165-166:32

Today is the first two pages of chapter 7, Physiology. Mary Baker Eddy starts discussing Mind, mortal mind, body, and physicians so in some regard this feels like a continuation of the last chapter -- or at least a good transition to this one. This is a chapter I usually read when I'm working on a physical challenge although

The thing I noted

Mind is all that [1] feels, [2] acts, or [3] impedes action.
 It's the last point that caught my attention -- impedes action. Why would God impede action? What action would God impede?

Maybe I'm reading to closely and literally. I think I'll edit the sentence: Mind is all. I'll work with that for today.

Friday, March 26, 2010

Day 85: MIND

162:12 - 164:29

Today is the last day of this chapter.It's nickname is Mind.

I didn't remember all the quotes about medicine at the end of the chapter. That surprised me. There are certain chapters that I favor, this has never been one of them.

The first thing I underlined is

The indestructible faculties of Spirit exist without the conditions of matter and also without the false beliefs of a so-called material existence.
The last thing I underlined is
But the forever fact remains paramount that Life, Truth, and Love save from sin, disease, and death. 
The funny thing is I would have said something like this myself, in my own clumsy words if Mary Baker Eddy hadn't written it. People want to believe this in a philosophical way but why not a literal way?

Day 84: Change of Base

160:9 - 162:11

Ok, so blogger ate this post somehow. I had it written and published and poof -- gone to a better place. So I will reconstruct it as best I can. I had some nasty comment about the NY Times article but since my wonderful words are gone, I'll skip it with this version.

These two pages are more about the body and mortal mind. The first thing I underlined is

Unless muscles are self-acting at all times, they are never so...
Self-acting, self-will, self.

The next thing I underlined was:

The effect of this Science is to stir the human mind to a change of base, on which it may yield to the harmony of the divine Mind.
This change of base is a shift in my thought and it's working as long as I stick with it. I expect a solid course from point A to point B but it's more like a wavy line that gets less wavy as it moves from left to right.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Day 83: Spiritual basis of Action

158:1-160:8

In this section, Mary Baker Eddy discusses the ancient history of medicine and the result of mortal thought on the body. Toward the end of the passage, she uses the phrase:

spiritual basis of action
I don't think she meant spiritual basis of physical action, I think she meant a change of thought. This might require prayer, or talking to the patient (at this point, myself), or even a change of scenery.

At least for me, I would like to take it one step further. Not a reaction (spiritual or otherwise) to a situation, but rather an examination of each thought and what action I'm taking. I'm trying to examine my thinking for areas that need correction and improvement before they become situations I need to react to with spiritual healing.

So back to a spiritual basis of action. I'll reword it. A spiritual basis of thought. Then another reword. A spiritual thought. While I can't doing that all day long, I'm starting to do it more. It feels a lot like meditation but different, more active.


Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Day 82: What is an idea?

156:5 - 157:32

The first paragraph of this section has an account of a case of dropsy which required tapping.Mary Baker Eddy worked with this patient by attenuating the medication then changing over to a placebo. The patient improved even though no medication entered her body. But the patient didn't know the pills were placebos. So it was a mental drugging of a kind, not physical.

The first line I marked was:

In metaphysics, matter disappears from the remedy entirely, and Mind takes its rightful and supreme place. 
I've been thinking a lot about how matter is the dream which isn't really there. The five senses are powerful and hypnotic. I want those five senses in waking life as much as dream life. But are they real? I've also been thinking about the idea of a thing recently. If I didn't have sight, how would I perceive my existence. I don't mean on a physical level but on a spiritual level. How would I perceive any ideas? What would an existence of all the ideas be like?

The other one I marked is:

...Life is continuous and harmonious.
Harmony is a funny idea. It's easily hidden under the seeming details of life: the little judgements, and thoughts in my own mind. I've been standing porter at the door more actively lately.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Day 81: Faith in Drugs

153:25 - 156:4

The pages are about the majority faith in drugs for curative properties. The idea the a collective thought among people having power is...I don't know what the word it, startling isn't right. For the most part, I work through issues in C.S. on one track of thought, perhaps not a deep track, but a dependable line. Then I read something and think, I'm missing something. I can see there is more but how do I get to it. I had that again today.

The first line I noticed is:

Neither sympathy nor society should ever tempt us to cherish error in any form, and certainly we should not be error's advocate.
Most of my everyday friends are not C.S. and do talk about their sickness, and pain as if it is normal. I battle with myself as to how to handle this. I think it is uncaring to avoid the conversation altogether, nor do I want to disrespect their own beliefs but what do I say? My non-C.S. parents-in-law have come to the point in their life where their bodily well-being is the conversation of the day. This is beyond annoying, even from a non-C.S. perspective. I just want to get up and leave the room but I'm not the most chatty person anyway so I come off as distant regardless of the topic. Then to add this slant to the conversation -- I appear uncaring. That isn't the case but I just think their train of thought is off.I don't think another trip to the doctor or another prescription is the answer. How do I respect my own beliefs and not offend theirs?

The next thing I noted was:

percentage of power on the side of this Science must mightily outweigh the power of popular belief in order to heal a single case of disease 
The idea of 'percentage of power' caught my attention as well as the idea it is required for a single case. Collective thought, percentage of power...this sounds like a all out battle of good versus evil. No that's not right. Mortal mind versus Mind is more like it. And the idea that me, the individual is part of the collective and contributes and has power, not just for my own spiritual purpose but for someone else's single case of disease. I feel inspired and accountable for that nameless, faceless other person, or people -- humanity as a whole.

By the way, any questions you find in this blog are not rhetorical. If you have an idea from a C.S. perspective, please share.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Day 80: Attenuation of Truth

152:10 - 153:24

Today's passage is a page and a half and focuses on the idea of attenuation which is the idea of reducing a drug to such a little amount that the actual properties of the curing drug are in question. Mary Baker Eddy's counter point is to use "a high attenuation of Truth" to cure the patient.

I don't want the Truth attenuated (thinned down) but I don't want to loose myself in too many points to concentrate on either. Perhaps attenuation of Truth means focused into of thinned down. I read in a Sentinel I while back I man's account of how he beginnings a treatment. He starts with the first chapter of Genesis - which is the primary example of the beginning/only concept (beginning signifies the only).

This chapter focused on Mind instead of Science, Theology, and Medicine so I think I will focus on one Mind as the curative. MBE ends this section with this:

The fact that pain cannot exist where there is no mortal mind to feel it is proof that this so-called mind makes its own pain -- that is, its own belief in pain.

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Day 79: Man governed by God

150:4 - 152:9

Some sections of this chapter I struggled to find anything on the two pages. This section, I underlined way too much. The main idea is covered in this paragraph:

Mortal belief says that death has been occasioned by fright. Fear never stopped being and its action. The blood, heart, lungs, brain, etc., have nothing to do with Life, God. Every function of the real man is governed by the divine Mind. The human mind has no power to kill or to cure, and it has no control over God's man. The divine Mind that made man maintains His own image and likeness. The human mind is opposed to God and must be put off, as St. Paul declares. All that really exists is the divine Mind and its idea, and in this Mind the entire being is found harmonious and eternal. The straight and narrow way is to see and acknowledge this fact, yield to this power, and follow the leadings of truth.
The first thing I noticed is that the paragraph summary is includes the word Mind. Second, the paragraph itself uses the word mind several times. This third thing I noticed was the idea of the beginning/only - as in God maintains his own [only] image. This isn't a treatment, but its powerful. It's too large to memorize and think about during the day so I'm going to mentally strip it down the words maintenance and function


Friday, March 19, 2010

Day 78: Back to "Peace, Be Still"

148:7 - 150:3

I've been working over the material in my mind of the last 78 days. "Peace, Be Still" is fresh in my mind. I'm leaning on it a lot when I'm irritated. I'm also going back to "Patience, Meekness, Love, and Good Deeds."

Today's two items that are marked are:

Whatever guides thought spiritually benefits mind and body. 
Right now, this journal is guiding my thought. But I want to quiet my thought so I can hear the Truth. So peace, be still.
We need to [1] understand the affirmations of divine Science, [2] dismiss superstition, and [3] demonstrate truth according to Christ.
Understanding the affirmations isn't as easy as understanding the negations, at least to me. So I totally see why Mary Baker Eddy made the first point here. Superstition comes in a wide variety. Some are obvious but most are not. I have to be diligent about what I let into my thought and whether I immediately know the truth about it.

On a side note here, I love this line because it almost sounds contemporary:

The logic is lame, and facts contradict it.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Day 77: WWJD

146:13 - 148:6

So I'm from Texas. And in Texas, you can drive around easily spot bumperstickers that say "WWJD?" The fisrt time I say this, I knew exactly what it meant because that thought had been running around in my head too: "What would Jesus Do?"

It's a general question that can be applied to any situation. Your in some fix and need a way out, and you ask yourself, what would Jesus do? It assumes you have knowledge of some, most, or all of his history but it does give you historical examples to pull from.

In these two pages, Mary Baker Eddy is still talking about the Scientific healings of Jesus. She mentions that while he healed, he didn't leave any system of rules for those healings:

He prescribed no drugs, urged no obedience to material laws, but acted in direct disobedience to them.
So this is what I've been reminding myself lately. He didn't use drugs, so why should I? Occasionally, he made paste from mud or something like that. These weren't medicinal applications but more symbolic in my mind. Were they symbolic of his advice to use drugs or not use drugs? I don't think he 'put' medicine in the paste, I think he didn't really need the paste to begin with but the other people did in order to change their thought.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Day 76: Peace, be still

144:8 - 146:12

These two pages continue on with Medicine versus Christian Science. I'm continuing on in thought from yesterday's idea that the first/only is important in Christian Science and signifies God. The first thing I marked was:

The more material a belief, the more obstinately tenacious its error
I think the reserve could be said as well - the more obstinate the error, the more material the belief will appear. I'm still working on my irritation (aka allergies). Yesterday was a particularly irritating day. That seems to happen: just as I focus on a particular misthought and work on it, it grows or strikes back. Of course, I remember this in hindsight each time when I should remember it before. Obviously, I've also been irritated with myself. Not good.

Truth, and not corporeal will, is the divine power which says to disease, "Peace, be still."
I like that Mary Baker Eddy threw will power into this discussion of medicine. It reminds me not to bully my way through to a healing. I watched a movie last night about Buddhists and thing that struck me is how religion asks us to be still, be quiet in order to listen and reflect. So when I saw this last bit of the sentence I thought how perfect, I went to bed thinking about that.

Being still in thought means not being irritated, to me. I'll work on that one today.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Day 75: Medicine

142:25 - 144:7

Today starts the topic of Medicine.

There are several items marked:

Mind, not matter, must have been the first medicine
I've been thinking about how Christian Science explains the first/only of whatever the quote is at the moment. I'm not sure where I'm going with that but it is in my thought.
Truth is God's remedy for error of every kind
Truth as remedy -- truth being that God is the only, and man is the reflection.
you continue in the old routine
I've been feeling this a lot lately. I'm on the cusp of change but I'm not there yet.
The body is not controlled scientifically by a negative mind.
This one spoke to me directly -- my negative mind. 

I've been thinking a lot about hope as a type of expectation lately.

Monday, March 15, 2010

Day 74:

140:4-142:24

I underlined two items. The first is:

We shall obey and adore in proportion as we apprehend the divine nature and love Him understandingly
I italicized the words that meant the most to me. I am adoring more as I gain in this journal. That encourages me to keep going.

The next thing:

to set aside even the most cherished beliefs and practices, to leave all for Christ
This is probably were I need to constantly examine my thought for what beliefs and practices I'm continuing when I know (or don't know) that they are obstacles in my way.

As I mentioned yesterday, I've been working with the belief of irritation. Every time I found myself frustrated today, I would go back to realizing I was frustrated. Then I tried to think of that list of words on the other side against frustration: patience, trust, perfection, harmony, balance.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Day 73: One sentence, two lists

138:17-140:3

These two pages Christianity versus contemporary religious thought in Mary Baker Eddy's day. She focuses on what Jesus' theology was.

There are three sentences that I turned into lists, but I want to focus on just one of them. For most of my life here is how I read this sentence:

Our Master said to every follower: "[1] Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature!...[2]Heal the sick!...[3] Love thy neighbor as thyself!"
When I read the first point, I focused on preach and totally ignored the first part. Then I took class instruction and here is how I heard someone else read the sentence:

Our Master said to every follower: "[1] Go ye into all the world, and [2] preach the gospel to every creature!...[3]Heal the sick!...[4] Love thy neighbor as thyself!"
The idea of the new first point is that you can't hide your head in the sand and still obey the command. It also means that to be a Christian isn't to be alone or solitary but to have relationships with people that include the other points.  I've been working on being in the world this last year but I would rather be alone - so at this point, the letter but not the spirit. Another thing to work on.

Unrelated - sort of
Two ideas that have come to me to work on are time and irritation.

Time: I am dominated by my belief in time in so many ways. As an example, I usually have at least two time pieces on my body at all times: watch and phone. And a third within visual range. Does that make any sense? No. I've been thinking about ideas to overcome this from a spiritual perspective.

Irritation: So, within the last two years, I've come to have the symptoms of spring-time allergies but the funny thing is I don't believe in allergies. So what's up with that? Well, I have been irritated a lot in the last few years and yes, the worst of it is in the spring. It's been a slow realization about how irritated I am emotionally with some of the people, events, and circumstances in my life. While sitting in church today, I started mapping out a C.S. treatment for myself. My teacher told me to do one a day so I would be in the habit but did I listen? Oh, no. So here I am, absolutely tired of blowing my nose, and wanting to not be irritated with myself and the people in my life. The words that came to me were patience, trust, perfection, harmony, balance. 

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Day 72: Who or What heals?

135:21-138:16

This is a little longer wordcount to read today so if you need extra time, start early.

This section covers the idea of who or what healed. Some thought Jesus a medium for dead prophets. Jesus tried to explain this in two ways: his works and his words.

The first thing that caught my eye, and it does every time I see it is:

cycles of divine light
Mary Baker Eddy only uses the term cycles when referring to Christian Science twice in Science and Health and five times in Miscellaneous Writings. She doesn't explain it. I wonder if some of her writings in the library cover this.

The next thing:

He claimed no intelligence, action, nor life separate from God.
The reason this caught my attention was because I had to ask myself: Do I claim a separation from God? The answer is yes, repeatedly. Not intentionally but mistakenly. I need to work on that. It also made me think of my teacher instructing me to be obedient in this journal of reading for a year. Who am I obedient to and why?

Toward the end of this passage, Mary Baker Eddy gets to the meat of the discussion. Sometimes when I read this book, I would blast through pages at a time. I didn't concentrate or listen. It was probably a waste because I see so many things now, taking it slowly, a few pages at a time. I see themes, and subjects, and terminology, and emotion. I didn't see those before.

So the last sentence is:

He showed that diseases were cast out neither by corporeality, by materia medica, nor by hygiene, but by the divine Spirit, casting out the errors of mortal mind. The supremacy of Spirit was the foundation on which Jesus built. His sublime summary points to the religion of Love.
Casting out the errors of mortal mind is how he did it. And he based it on the supremacy of Spirit. That's it. That's the explanation. It's simple.

Last night I had a conversation with someone. It was both familiar and very disappointing. I wanted to cry at the end of it. I thought, wow, I really am depending on material conditions (a relationship) to provide not only my happiness but my fulfillment. I knew, I had to change that and depend on God. In the last seventy something days, he had shown me what a change in thought is capable of doing. I don't have all of it yet. But I have enough to pick myself up from a depressing experience and know that isn't the truth of who I am or where I am. 

Friday, March 12, 2010

Day 71: Hope within

133:8-135:20

In this passage, Mary Baker Eddy discusses Judaism and miracles.

The first thing that caught my attention was:

the natural law of harmony which overcomes discord
Beyond it's Christian Science meaning, I've been thinking about the meaning of the terms organic and natural from Mary Baker Eddy's time to this. She uses the word organic to mean literally human organs and she refers to natural as spiritual. Now, organic means natural in a physical or originally material state. And organic and natural are somewhat interchangeable now. Since I've been reading for 71 days now, when I see those words in a non-CS environment (news, Internet, magazines, conversation), I compare how the words are used. Which meaning is being used and why? How am I interpreting the word versus how it was meant? I'm not sure where that is going -- but my thought is definitely changing.

The next thing:

There is divine authority for believing in the superiority of spiritual power over material resistance.
Divine authority stands out. It's a sentence filled with hope and I need that right now.

And:

Spiritual evolution alone is worthy of the exercise of divine power. 
Tonight, I was once again reminded that spiritual evolution is, in almost all regards, a solo journey. I wish to pass through this phase and get on with the next of my journey. I don't mean death, I mean understanding.

And lastly:

What cannot God do?
I've been thinking about some of the changes that have happened in the last 71 days. I expected to be aware of the change when it happened, but I wasn't. I know now that there are many things that will occur on my spiritual journey, and only as I keep going will I realize them, long after they happen. That's also a very hopeful thought.




Definition: cultus

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Day 70: Theology & Faith

131:12-133:7

Mary Baker Eddy started a new section of the chapter titled Theology. I think of it as organized religion. She used both the Jewish established theology in Jesus' time as well as the Christian churches of her own time. This is a difficult task. The role of organized religion is to stand guard over the principles of the faith. Not embrace or expand the theology to deviations or complete changes of thought.

There are three items in these paragraphs that caught my attention. The first:

recounting his works instead of referring to his doctrine

I think we all would like to be able to do this on a personal level. Somehow my works don't stand up to my faith.I need to work on this, more than just this journal.


The second:

blessed is he, whosoever shall no be offended in me

Offended is an interesting word to use here. I looked up this phrase and found a lot of different wording to think about. Doubt is one of the words that came up as a different meaning for offended. I wonder if this is a carry over from the reluctant guest. It feels like it but it's not exactly right.

The last one is:

unity of God, -- the divine Principle which brings out all harmony
I know this is probably something that would make more sense to me if I had a better understanding of either religion in the time of Mary Baker Eddy or of Jesus. Why is God not unified? Is that the right word? Anyway, what else would he be and why? This isn't rhetorical -- I really don't know.

But that it brings out all harmony -- this is the mathematical equation again. There is only one God and he is all.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Day 69: Doubt Evil

130:7-131:11

A quick read but several ideas came to mind. The first line I marked is:

It is vain to speak dishonestly of divine Science, which destroys all discord, when you can demonstrate the actuality of Science. It is unwise to doubt if reality is in perfect harmony with God, divine Principle, --if Science, when understood and demonstrated, will destroy all discord,--since you admit that God is omnipotent; for from this premise it follows that good and its sweet concords have all-power.

Vanity is an interesting word for Mary Baker Eddy to use. One definition is empty but others include the words pride and deceit. I think all all work equally well in conveying the meaning of the paragraph. A student's issue with Christian Science may be one or all three, or something else entirely. I never felt free enough to delve beyond the work supplied or its most-obvious implied meaning before this reading.

The next:

Laboring long to shake the adult's faith in matter and to inculcate a grain of faith in God,--an inkling of the ability of Spirit to make the body harmonious,--the author has often remembered our Master's love for little children, and understood how truly such as they belong to the heavenly kingdom.
And then:

to be astounded at the vigorous claims of evil and doubt them
That's where I should be. That's my goal.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Day 68: The reluctant guest

128:4-130:6

These two pages discuss what Christian Science is from an intellectual perspective using mathematics and logic as examples. But to me the most interesting part is the last paragraph of the reluctant guest. To pick up this book and read it means someone wants to know what Christian Science is. Someone wants to know how Christian Science fits in the world around them, or doesn't. But the reluctant guest is the person who understands what the book requires of the reader, the science required from the student, and yet someone says "maybe this isn't for me- maybe too much is required, too much given up."

Now I've gotten to this point in the book, searching for any tidbits I haven't seen or understood, really understood, before. I have to ask myself, am I the reluctant guest? Have I changed my mind or not committed fully?

The last section of the book is titled Fruitage and is full of healings solely based on reading this book. There are some vices I didn't expect to give up as part of reading this book. I didn't think they were anything to be healed of or I wasn't ready to let them go. However, in the last few days, one of these vices slipped away. I wasn't praying about it specifically so I don't know that I would call it a healing per se. But it was getting in the way of what I wanted to accomplish so I just stopped. If there was one thing I was reluctant about, it was that - giving up some little treasure of selfishness.



Monday, March 8, 2010

Day 67: demonstrated through Mind

126:8-128:3

So the sections I marked start with:

Human thought never projected the least portion of true being. 
This tells me to get out of my own head -- I like that. It also buts a truthful slant to human thought and opinion in general.

The next statement:

I have demonstrated through Mind...
I thought this was an interesting way for Mary Baker Eddy to say it -- demonstrated through Mind. So I looked up Mind which is defined in Recapitulation.Two things came to thought. First, a couple of days ago MBE used the phrase restful Mind. The second is that she is comparing Mind to mortal mind or put another way God's thoughts compared to human thoughts.

The next statement:

If God, the All-in-all, be the creator of the spiritual universe, including man, then everything entitled to a classification as truth, or Science, must be comprised in a knowledge or understanding of God, for there can be nothing beyond illimitable divinity.
I shortened this so I could see what really caught my attention:

everything must be comprised in an understanding of God
I don't know what to say about it but it was nice, comforting.

So I mentioned a possible nickname as Good Mind. Then she said restful Mind. So there's definitely a Mind thing going on in this chapter.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Day 66: Man's harmony

124:3-126:7

The first sentence I focused on is:

[1]Adhesion, [2] cohesion, and [3] attraction are properties of Mind.

I've linked up the dictionary for each of these three words. They are very nearly the same. I don't know why Mary Baker Eddy decided to list all three but I like to think she was throwing the largest circle of meaning possible by using all three instead of one. We reflect these properties so we adhere, cohere and attract each other.Something like that. Its a different way to discuss harmony with our body and harmony with others. 

The next sentence:

Neither organic inaction nor overaction is beyond God's control;
I always look up organic just to remember it meant our organs so long ago, not a farming style. So this sentence is also about harmony.

And the last sentence:

Reflecting God's government, man is self-governed.
This self-government was probably at this point of the page meant to be a physical self-government but I think it applies well to any part of man.

When I read these two pages, I underlined, then kept reading and I didn't get an overall theme for the pages - sometimes I do, but not today. I went back and studied these sentences for meaning and relationship. And then I saw the connection of harmony. I'm so glad someone thought up this journal idea of two pages a day. It helps me focus and not read too quickly or forget what I read.

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Day 65: What caught your attention on this day in the Journal?

122:1-124:2

Some days, like today, I want to strip away most of Science & Health. I know Mary Baker Eddy's personal history. I know about her healing. I know the new testament -- sort of. I want to skip the beginning, and some of the middle ground of S&H and just get to it.

I appreciate MBE's clear writing. On pages like this, I don't have to struggle for meaning. I get it. But I struggle for a new thought or a changed thought or something I never noticed before. Or something to lean on, pray about, to change from belief to understanding.

Is there something on this page that grabbed you? Some word or sentence you underlined and wanted to come back to?

Friday, March 5, 2010

Day 64: God -- a restful Mind

119:25-121:32

These two pages make heavy use of the Sun and the Earth as an analogy of God and man.

The first thing that caught my attention was:

man, who is but a humble servant of the restful Mind

Mary Baker Eddy uses this in the same paragraph she talks about Earth orbiting the Sun. She uses imagery and symbolism, sometimes in ambiguous ways. I worry I take the imagery too far or not far enough. But a restful Mind. I don't care about the imagery. I just want to be part of that restful Mind. I wonder if this is like her usage of Divine Logic, a frequent topic which I never noticed before.

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Day 63: God, man, and leaven walk into a bar

117:29-119:24

So my title is a little off. I feel like what I'm reading is impossible to write about other than to say - read that line - isn't it great - that line, right there?

Today's pages cover two topics. The first is Mary Baker Eddy explaining the leaven hid in three measures of meal. It sort of goes along and then on line 13 of page 118, MBE takes a turn. It sort of seems subtle, I had to read it several times. There is something in that paragraph screaming at me and I'm smiling like an idiot like I get it but there something underneath it, that I'm still working on.

The second issue or really a continuation of MBE's current explanation of God and man. She pulls another whammy on page 119, the paragraph starting on line 17. Sometimes I don't get what she is saying until she says what the opposite is. Then I get it.

I'm not sure what to take from these pages. I might have to read it several more times. Do you ever feel like that? As if it is to immense, to important.

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Day 62: What or Who is God in Christian Science?

116:11-117:28

Mary Baker Eddy spends two pages talking about God, and at the very end Jesus. In her own writing, several words are italicized to differentiate them:


These two sentences I underlined have to do with a physical challenge I'm working on healing right now:
... God is all, therefore matter is nothing beyond an image in mortal mind
Evidence drawn from the five physical senses relates solely to human reason...
Then a little bit later:
 Truth is a revelation.
So I think this is the third time MBE has made a direct connection (although in two different sentences) to Divine Logic is revelation. This time its worded slightly differently so it might not mean the same thing but I don't buy coincidence - I think this is planned to lead me somewhere.

The one thought that I come back to on the Divine Logic is revelation front - is revelation a synonym for understanding or seeing the future. I know in at least one instance, it meant the later but to me, I keep reading it as Divine Logic will give me understanding.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Day 61: Good is Mind

114:1-116:10

So technically yesterday's post included the quote "Good is Mind" but it didn't make sense until I read today's pages. The first sentence set it out for me:

Usage classes both evil and good together as mind.
In order to distinguish between God and mortal mind, Mary Baker Eddy is saying God is good. Good is Mind (from yesterday's post). So Divine Mind can only be good, never evil. And man, as reflecting God can never reflect an evil Mind or have an evil mind. Evil makes it very black and white. I can think of a lot other words to get the idea across: mind is not sad, mind is not feeling pain, mind is not angry - on and on. So now I have some context for Good is Mind and I like it. I think that might be a possible nickname for the chapter: Good Mind.

I did have to look up solecism. I've probably looked it up before.

The sentence I marked and want to think about more is:

Science shows that what is termed matter is but a subjective state of what is termed by the author mortal mind.

Monday, March 1, 2010

Day 60: The School of Christian Science

112:3-113:32

In today's two pages, Mary Baker Eddy discusses the various schools of Christian Science and explains there is only one school. This was an issue in her time but not so much ours. Most offshoot groups don't want to use the same words. I can't tell you how many times people have asked "Oh, that's the Tom Cruise religion, right?" No. Totally different.

MBE mentions how CS has rules and laws and the demonstration of those. Any idea that departs for those rules is just human opinion - and not a demonstrable rule. But before she gets bogged down, she says:

The vital part, the heart and soul of Christian Science, is Love.

Then she states the four propositions of CS:


  1. God is All-in-All.
  2. God is good. Good is Mind. 
  3. God, Spirit, being all, nothing is matter. 
  4. Life, God, omnipotent good, deny[:] death, evil, sin, disease. --Disease, sin, evil, death, deny [:] good, omnipotent God, Life.

I added the colons because sometimes I get lost in the meaning of a sentence only due to its grammatical make up. This helps me understand how I think I should read it.


I think the most interesting item in the list, the one I wonder exactly what MBE meant, is Good is Mind. The others I get. Mind is a syn for God but why Mind? Why not one of the other seven synonyms? I think there might be something more here that I'm missing.


I don't think its something superficial like she's discussing schools of thought so she used Mind to tie back to school as opposed to Principle which would tie back to rule or law. I think there is something more there. But what?


I have a challenging day ahead of me on the personal front. Mulling this over will give me something to think about -- more than a distraction -- almost a lifeboat. Good is Mind. That's where I'll be today.