Day 271: The Purpose of 2 Stories

542:27-544:27

I didn’t think much about Christian Science Treatments or know the details until I took class instruction. That isn’t to say the information was secret; I just wasn’t interested in pursuing it. But now that I’m a few days back from annual association of class instruction, and it ended with example treatments, they are on my mind.

These two stories are so clearly different in every possible way. I’m sure there is a scholarly reason for including both, just as the four gospels recount the same stories of Jesus (sort of). But from a figurative perspective, a spiritual perspective, they appear to be parts of an original treatment.

There are two quotes in this reading that hit home for me.

…a material creation which followed the spiritual, – a creation so wholly apart from God’s, that Spirit had no participation in it.

And,

man exists because God exists

Day 270: Cain & Abel

540:25-542:26

I never did like the story of Cain and Abel. It is a childhood disagreement taken to an extreme. We want to teach our children (and people in general) to love then we, as Christians, start with these awful stories from the Bible.

Mary Baker Eddy points out two jobs of Truth:

• Truth, through her eternal laws, unveils error.
• Truth causes sin to betray itself, and sets upon error the mark of the beast.

Then she lists what happens if error is shirked:

The avoidance of justice and the denial of truth tend to [1]perpetuate sin, [2]invoke crime, [3]jeopardize self-control, and [4]mock divine mercy.

This list makes me think MBE probably observed a lot of children because this is exactly what a child does.

Day 269: Moral Chemicalization

538:23-540:24

I think it is an interesting point that this section becomes a comparison of Cain to Jesus. Mary Baker Eddy doesn’t do it out right, she just ignores Cain, now born, altogether. And only discusses Jesus. That’s really her whole point is to not give the material one second of thought, but only the spiritual.

Point #1

In moral chemicalization, when the symptoms of evil, illusion, are aggravated, we may think in our ignorance that the Lord hath wrought an evil, but we ought to know that God’s law uncovers so-called sin and its effects, only that Truth may annihilate all sense of evil and all power to sin.

This is a good point to remember in Christian Science because while I am in the chemicalization, I may not know what sin is being uncovered. I need to remember I am passing through a chemicalization when the worst of it is upon me and not in an endless mortal situation.

Point #2

The purpose of the Hebrew allegory, representing error as assuming a divine character, is to teach mortals never to believe a lie.

I think, for me, the issue is to remember what the lie is. The little lies are easy to see through. But the one big lie is not.

Day 268: Literal vs. Inspired

536:30-538:22

In this section, Mary Baker Eddy makes several points about this second story that I want to remember.

1. Knowledge of evil was never the essence of divinity or manhood.
2. The purpose of the second story is to depict the falsity of error and the effects of error.
3. Inspired writers interpret the Word spiritually, while the ordinary historian interprets it literally.
4. Literally taken, the story is contradictory in places.
5. Literally taken, God’s love is changeable.
6. Literally taken, Man is not allowed to reform.

Day 267: Sorrow, Desire, & Rule

535:6-536:29

Well, now. Adam and Eve get a talking to – don’t they. The 2nd Story God lays down the punishment.

The woman will multiply her sorrow, her only desire to serve her husband, and he (her husband) shall rule over her. God just made man the god of woman. So now there are many gods.

Mary Baker Eddy’s response is right on:

Divine Science deals its chief blow at the supposed material foundations of life and intelligence.

The material foundation are not only how man is created but how man and woman are to live, which in Science is in harmony, with only one god – God.

Then God turns to man and says he can’t eat of that tree anymore, man can eat herb of the field, bread. Ok. so why isn’t this passage (Genesis 3:17-19) taken literally if so many religions want to take Genesis 3:16 literally? Just bread for man. 

Then Mary Baker Eddy sums up what this 2nd Story God did:

The illusion of sin is without hope or God.

Day 266: Enmity between Man & Woman

533:5-535:5

When I read Genesis 3:15 in this section, I couldn’t believe it. I don’t read the second story much accept as it is used in the weekly bible lesson, so I didn’t remember the actual wording. Wow. Those are some powerful and hateful words to attribute to God. No wonder a God of Love isn’t universally accepted.

To me, this just clarifies that it is an erroneous story and the two stories combine to be the first treatment of man.

Day 265: Death

531:8-533:4

The Adam dream (the second story) has an interesting figurative twist. Adam believed he would die if he ate the apple and so he hadn’t until woman offered it to him. The death wasn’t material but spiritual. So this story has two lies to tell us. First that we are material, and second we will stay that way.

Day 264: Right & Wrong

529:13-531:7

The Adam and Eve story resonated with me, when I was a child, because it was so bucolic and wonderful, it sounded like living in a zoo. Then the story turns and the fun is gone and the kids get punished, and forever after the world will remember these two and how they broke the rules.

Now as an adult, I think what a horrid story to tell a child. And then to tell them it is true and that’s how the world started. What a miserable burden to place on them.

The last sentence in today’s reading says “mind and soul are both right and wrong.” That is how my days have felt, striving to do right but somehow I don’t. When I examine the microsecond where my good motives turned into bad results, I know what happened. I stopped listening and decided for myself what I would do. In that moment, I choose to rather be right and wrong instead of listen to Right.

Sometimes I wish God had a bullhorn.

Day 263: Dust

527:6-529:12

This reading covers a point I’ve been brooding over, namely what is a sentient being. It was an episode of Star Trek, Next Generation that stuck with me. The gist of that show was, did the machine/person known as Data, have rights as any other person. And the test was: is the being sentient? Of course, the television show had very specific legal wording for the test but the idea was compelling.

I’ve wondered what Mrs. Eddy would say along these lines as I read the book but I now see it’s a false argument, right along with the second story. She summarizes it in this reading with this question:

Was it requisite for the formation of man that dust should become sentient…

The idea of sentient being, in Star Trek (and current culture) assumes materiality as a starting point, and classifies it as sentient or not. In Christian Science, it is assumed no materiality as a starting point for all sentient beings (God’s ideas). Notice I said starting point. That’s what I’m beginning to realize is that this book is the mind shift to the beginning.

I’m beginning to see that only radical science moves me beyond the beginning.

Day 262: The Tree of Knowledge

525:7-527:5

This reading pits the Tree of Life (first story) against the Tree of Knowledge (second story). It might be more clear if the tree were called Material Belief or even False Belief. The idea is that the knowledge that the tree has and imparts is not of God but of false belief. A lie.

I last sentence of the reading is:

Man is God’s reflection, needing no cultivation, but ever beautiful and complete.

Cultivation could be interpreted to mean education (academic, such as college). I have someone in my life who never extends beyond the basics of life and looks down on anyone that does – like me. If given an opportunity, I would be a professional student, always in school learning.

So I wonder if Mary Baker Eddy was worried about the influence cultivation (education) would have on a student of Christian Science. When we open ourselves (and our minds) to an education, we are asking to be influenced with knowledge.

In my opinion, while I don’t think an education is requisite for spiritual growth, education is no different than any danger that we must guard against anywhere. We must listen to God for the right ideas and hold to our own highest sense of right and let that sense of right grow.

Day 261: The Pathway before Me

523:14-525:6

In this reading, Mary Baker Eddy uses the term “tribal god.” The idea is that a small group of people could devise a deity to serve some purpose is interesting because in a non-religious way, people do that all the time. We construct beliefs to serve our purpose and explain our circumstance. Kids are great at this because they are so fluid in their determination. One day they like hotdogs, the next they don’t. One day the rainbow is made with crayons in the sky by a giant, the next is a fairy with watercolors. I’m going to start looking for tribal gods in my home and thought and show them the door.

Mary Baker Eddy also asks the questions “Is this addition [material man] to His creation real or unreal?” and “Does Spirit enter dust, and lose therein the divine nature and omnipotence?”

I’ve been thinking about about real and not real, dream and not dream. The idea that my spiritual journey right now it looking for the infinite path, as opposed to taking my first steps on the path is very interesting. I came to this thought from the last few days of mulling over

Even eternity can’t reveal the whole of God.

You might think it doesn’t make a different if I’m looking for the path or on the path but it does to me. I need to know that spiritual progress is an obtainable goal. And while I feel, this year, I’ve made progress – baby steps at the most. I’m not saying I’m discouraged, just that the work to be done is so much more than I expected.

I’ve felt that way about a lot of things this year. I should have started sooner. 

Day 260: The 2nd Story in Genesis

521:18-523:13

There are 2 stories and they are very different. The first is abstract, vague, and wonderful. The second is specific, concrete, and error. Oddly, the second story is considered the story. I bet it’s the specificity and concreteness that people like, but the story is not happy in the end and people, loads of people, still subject women as an entire gender to crap based on what is written in that second story.

So I’m a first story person, obviously.

But I had a thought. Most of us create something in our lives and we want that creation (children, house, business, etc) to endure beyond us. We aren’t building temporary creations. But the second story is. The earth gets to stick around forever in the story but the people are disposable. I can’t imagine any being of love creating that.

Day 259: Divine Infinite Calculus

519:22-521:17

Today’s readings continue the idea of a currently unknowable infinity:

Human language can repeat only an infinitesimal part of what exists.

The numerals of infinity, called seven days, can never be reckoned according to the calendar of time. These days will appear as mortality disappears, and they will reveal eternity, newness of Life, in which all sense of error forever disappears and thought accepts the divine infinite calculus.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the idea that there is so much to God and spirituality, that I won’t grasp it all. In so many ways, that’s not what organized religion is about: explaining Life. To tell the reader there is just too much for you to get at this time (that’s what I fell Mary Baker Eddy is saying), is realistic and pragmatic. It also puts the wonder back in the moment of reading Genesis.

Day 258: Complete

517:25-519:21

Yesterday, the idea of the forever Universe was brought up – eternity can never reveal the whole of God. In today’s reading, Mary Baker Eddy says

Thus the ideas of God in universal being are complete and forever expressed, for Science reveals infinity and the fatherhood and motherhood of Love. 

Since I am an idea of God, I am complete and forever expressed. My question is, is an idea of God (me) interchangeable for yesterday’s idea? Is the following correct?

Even eternity can never reveal the whole of [Me, God’s idea/reflection], since there is no limit to infinitude or its reflections.

If that is correct, what does that mean? That I (spiritual idea) continue to grow (spiritually) forever? I think my difficulty is complete but still unrevealed. I could make some huge metaphysical leaps here but I don’t want to run off in the wrong direction. If any reader has ideas, please comment below.

Day 257: The Forever Universe

515:11-517:24

Mary Baker Eddy spends the entire reading going over reflection and identity within God’s Infinity. That’s quite a bit to handle in two pages. The last sentence is:

Even eternity can never reveal the whole of God, since there is no limit to infinitude or to its reflections.

Several ideas came to me with that last sentence. If eternity can’t reveal all of God, there is something unknown, unexperienced. This current existence, even spiritually, isn’t all. I could go in a million different directions with that thought but I’ll leave it because I’m not sure if I would be going down the right path.

Day 256: Moral Courage

513:4-515:10

Mary Baker Eddy discusses moral courage in this section. It’s one of the few bits of theology that she might have in common with other religions. By that, I mean there should be agreement over what moral courage is but instead in the last decade, I felt a rift. There is a group of people nationally (U.S.), that believe moral courage is the ability to do respond with force in the name of God. I think of this as first testament moral courage – live by the sword, then you shall die by the sword mentality. I don’t agree with this and have termed what MBE describes as second testament moral courage. She first describes it as an animal, then notes three qualities about it, then says it is tenderness. That word alone will be my mark for moral courage from here on. It’s a high bar.

Moral courage is "the lion of the tribe of Juda," the king of the mental realm. Free and fearless it roams in the forest. Undisturbed it lies in the open   field, or rests in "green pastures, . . . beside the still waters." In the figurative transmission from the divine thought to the human, [1]diligence, [2]promptness, and [3]perseverance are likened to "the cattle upon a thousand hills." They carry the baggage of stern resolve, and keep pace with highest purpose. Tenderness accompanies all the might imparted by Spirit. The individuality created by God is not carnivorous…

A side note: If you are new to the tags at the end of this post, imagine a living, breathing index. Have you looked at the index of S&H lately? Imagine the whole world of CSers creating an index so that if you are working on an idea or challenge, you can look through what others have marked and get new ideas.

That’s how I plan to use my tags for these posts.

Day 255:

511:7-513:3

Yesterday was my son’s first day of school in the new building. He didn’t want to get dressed, put his shoes on, leave the house, get in the car. Once we were in the car, he was sure we were going the wrong way. So yesterday was a bit of a wash for me, hence no post.

Based on the reading, I was struck by how much discussion there is about animals, both literally and figuratively. I liked the idea that animals are ideas that reproduce their own and it made me think about ideas in a herd or sticking together. It made me think of my husband an children and how were are like ideas forming a family.

Day 254: Rarefaction

509:9-511:6

I had to look up rarefaction, first word I’ve looked up in a while for this journal. I wonder is it was in common use in Mary Baker Eddy’s day or just one of her words.

I found this interesting:

The periods of spiritual ascension are the days and seasons of Mind's creation, in which beauty, sublimity, purity, and holiness --yea, the divine nature--appear in man and the universe never to disappear.

I wondered if MBE was saying that our spiritual progress is found in days, seasons, – in our actual experience. She’s said something like this in different ways but the above quote was almost too beautiful and vague for me.

Day 253:

507:11-509:8

There are three distinct ideas in this reading that stood out to me. The first was the section about Mind as intelligence of a flower or see. The way it is worded gave me the idea to craft my own fill-in the blank phrase:

The only intelligence of ______________ is God.

I’m going to use this idea and put my son’s name in today.

The second idea is that gender is mental and:

Gender means simply kind or sort, and does not necessarily refer either to masculinity or femininity.

This idea of gender if widely held and understood would the the world so much good.

The third idea is about spiritually ascending into understanding as Jesus did on the third day. I thought the way Mary Baker Eddy phrased it, “letting in the light of spiritual understanding,” was great. That the light is already there and we only have to let it in instead of keep it out.

Day 252: Parenting & Understanding

505:4-507:10

Here are the two idea areas I found in the reading.

Spiritual Parenting

The divine Mine, not matter, creates all identities, and they are forms of Mind, the ideas of Spirit apparent only as Mind, never as mindless matter nor the so-called material senses.

Spirit duly feeds and clothes every object, as it appears in the line of spiritual creation, thus tenderly expressing the fatherhood and motherhood of God.

Spiritual Understanding

Spiritual understanding [1] unfolds Mind…—and [2] demonstrates the divine sense.

God unites understanding and eternal harmony.

Day 251:

503:6-505:3

The thought came to me today that while reading this chapter, I need to remember the first tenet, the inspired word. It is all to easy to get very literal and what-if the text when that isn’t what I’m reading it for.

Mary Baker Eddy writes the same thing several different ways in this reading but I underlined them all:

No supposition of error enters there.

God creates neither [1] erring thought, [2] mortal life, [3] mutable truth, nor [4] variable love.

Immortal Mind makes its own record, but [1] mortal mind, [2] sleep, [3] dreams, [4] sin, [5] disease, and [5] death have no record in the first chapter of Genesis.

This is a great support for the beginning/only idea of yesterday.

Day 250: Genesis

501-503:5

Just as a side note, I wonder why the chapter of Creation and the chapter of Genesis or so far apart in this book. It seems they would either be intertwined or consecutive.

I read an article in the Sentinel a while back where the author said he always went back to the idea of creation, Genesis, for his spiritual authority in Christian Science. He did a great job of explaining it – so much so that I agreed and remember it to this day. So this is what I expect I will get out of this chapter, but in my own way.

Today’s section includes just:

Genesis i. 1. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

I’ve thought about the beginning/only relationship explained for this passage before. The key phrase that caught me in today’s reading is:

The creative Principle … is God.

This phrase as two meanings to me. One, the obviously intended Principle is God. But the second one focuses more on the word creative. So many times (like right now!), I’m facing a situation that seems hopeless, and impossible to change, and I’m sitting on the sidelines, not even sure what to do. This phrase reminded me that not only is there one solution (G0d), but that solution is creative – my limited scope of possible solutions doesn’t count. God is creative Principle. The right solution will be found. Definitely a Go Team! moment for me.

Day 249: Million Dollar Question

495:25-497:27

Two questions are in this reading and I’ll handle both of them. The first is the one I have been racing after this year: How can I progress most rapidly in the understanding of Christian Science?

The one element of her answer, and there is a lot to it, that was new to me was:

error cannot destroy error

That seems obvious and straightforward. I shouldn’t even have to try to remember this – it is such an obvious point. However, – and this is a big however, the thought came to me as I read this that a snarky retort to someone’s less-than-loving comment was the error that doesn’t destroy error. Then my mind raced around to all the aggressive or meanly defensive things I tend to do. Oh, you probably wouldn’t think me a mean person but I’m not always kind either. So the idea of error, even in its more commonly accepted form, should be replaced.

My Answer: I would like to add my own answer to the above question. I was raised in Christian Science, although I would call that a spotty job done. I went to Prin and I took class instruction from a previous CS Church Board Member. Outwardly, I took the appropriate steps. Inwardly, I trudged along. I’ve read the book front to back maybe six times. But until this journal, where I knew I only had 5 minutes worth of reading but wanted to get enough out of it to 1) progress and 2) write about it – I focused. Not well all the time, but generally I focused. I focused through a bit of marital turbulence, and a bit of static with my son. And now I want to do it again next year. I have gotten SO MUCH out of this journal that I don’t understand why more people don’t do it. Or talk about it. I think every person who wants to take class instruction should take it only after reading this journal. Or, and this won’t happen but it’s nice to think about, do away with a two-week class, and make the whole thing based on this journal. Make each student work for a year processing Recapitulation by reading the entire book.

The second question asks about a creed. I wanted to boil these tenets down to very short thoughts for myself:

1. Inspired word of the Bible (not the literal word)
2. one supreme and infinite God
3. God’s forgiveness of sin
4. man is saved through Truth, Life, and Love
5. crucifixion and resurrection served to understand nothingness of matter
6. for that Mind to be in us which was in Christ Jesus

Day 248:

493:9-495:24

Funny thing about reading this chapter before this year journal – I always hated it. Now its another chapter I can’t wait to reread.

Something else I missed in the first read and need to go back and get the full text on: Will you explain sickness and show how it is to be healed?

A full answer to the above question involves teaching, which enables the healer to demonstrate and prove for himself the Principle and rule of Christian Science or metaphysical healing.

I didn’t realize teaching was a component of healing.

I would like to replace the word fear in the following quote with anger. While to me, they are the same thing, I don’t always remember it when reading a passage like this.

Disease is an experience of so-called mortal mind. It is fear made manifest on the body. Christian Science takes away this physical sense of discord, just as it removes any other sense of moral or mental inharmony.

There are some spots in the books where I think Mary Baker Eddy is particularly eloquent -- this question/answer is one example.

Day 247: Man, Dreams, and Death

491:17-493:8

This reading is so far down the line that I had to go back to page 488 to see that the question was: Do the five corporeal senses constitute man? The very first idea of the reading was Mary Baker Eddy saying it as plain as day:

The belief that matter and mind are one, – that matter is awake at one time and asleep at another, sometimes presenting no appearance of mind, – this belief culminates in another belief, that man dies. Science reveals material man as never the real being. The dream or belief goes on, whether our eyes are closes or open.

Then another formula:

God is Mind, and God is infinite; hence all is Mind.

Or:

[God is Mind] + [God is infinite] = [all is Mind]

And who are we:

Being is [1] holiness, [2] harmony, [3] immortality.

Day 246: New Connections

489:24-491:16

A few of things I would like to note about this reading. First, I think there might be several points that are new in recapitulation, to me anyway. I know this is probably error on my part. So the second thing is that I’m considering reading this journal again next year instead of moving on to misc writings. If I missed some key points and didn’t figure it out until around page 500, I wonder what else I missed. Third, if other people were blogging about their experience reading the book, and I could find/read those blogs, perhaps I wouldn’t have missed what I now consider very important points. Drat! Double Drat!

[Just spent 20 minutes trying to find an online link to the Journal for Misc Writings. Argh! I’ll post here and on the About Me page when I find it. Anyone know if it is officially out of print?]

First point:

The corporeal senses are the only source of evil or error. Christian Science shows them to be false, because matter has no sensation, and no organic construction can give it hearing and sight nor make it the medium of Mind. Outside the material sense of things, all is harmony.

This is the best definition of evil/error so far in the book – the first one that was applicable to my life and experience.

Will-power is but a product of belief, and this belief commits depredations on harmony. Human will is an animal propensity, not a faculty of Soul.

Will--blind, stubborn, and headlong--cooperates with appetite and passion. From this cooperation arises its evil. From this also comes its powerlessness, since all power belongs to God, good.

This is the first connection I’ve seen between human will and belief (or was it there in the trial somewhere?). Also another good tie into to evil.

Human belief--or knowledge gained from the so-called material senses--would, by fair logic, annihilate man along with the dissolving elements of clay.

Now a tie between belief and the material senses. The following formula isn’t exactly write but close to what I’m getting from this reading:

Material Senses = Belief = Will = Error/Evil

Thoughts?

And then the last little bit about sleep which I thought was a great example of what Mary Baker Eddy is trying to say:

Sleep and mesmerism explain the mythical nature of material sense. Sleep shows material sense as either oblivion, nothingness, or an illusion or dream. Under the mesmeric illusion of belief, a man will think that he is freezing when he is warm, and that he is swimming when he is on dry land. Needle-thrusts will not hurt him. A delicious perfume will seem intolerable. Animal magnetism thus uncovers material sense, and shows it to be a belief without actual foundation or validity. Change the belief, and the sensation changes. Destroy the belief, and the sensation disappears.

Day 245: Belief and Senses

487:13-489:23

This reading had two questions, the first dealing with belief, the second dealing with the material senses. I wish the ordering would have been different so that yesterday’s last question was followed by the sense question of today. I’m not sure that the belief question really needs to be in between. It is a minor point anyway.

So the question of belief brought me back to the trial again where false belief is the attorney for the plaintiff, personal sense. A couple of ideas from today’s reading were very clear:

The believer and belief are one and are mortal.

the Scriptures often appear in our common version to approve and endorse belief, when they mean to enforce the necessity of understanding.

I’m not sure if the common version is King James, but I suppose any version back then, and there were probably far fewer than now, would have the same issue.

The second question, about material senses, uses the term real senses of man:

mental endowments are not at the mercy of organization and decomposition, – otherwise the very worms could unfashion man. If it were possible for the real senses of man to be injured, Soul could reproduce them in all their perfection; but they cannot be disturbed nor destroyed, since they exist in immortal Mind, not in matter.

And then:

Corporeal sense defrauds and lies

Day 244: Spiritual vs. Material Sense

484:28-487:12

Today’s question, aside from some fancy word use, is asking about spiritual sense versus material sense. Material senses are so hypnotic, we depend on them more than is even necessary – we enjoy them. I wonder if I would even know the spiritual equivalent.

Day 243:

482:13-484:27

Today, the questions in Recapitulation are about healing and what is or isn’t involved. I was looking for a new idea or fresh insight when I found these two gems that seem to have nothing to do with healing at first glance:

One must fulfil one's mission without timidity or dissimulation, for to be well done, the work must be done unselfishly.

The physical universe expresses the conscious and unconscious thoughts of mortals.