Day 297: Time of the Year

597:16-599:8

Both time and year are in the Glossary. I especially liked this thought about year:

space for repentance

Day 296: Superstructure of Truth

595:7-597:15

The terms in this reading forced me to consider my own rites and ceremonies. What veil do I wear and what superstructure of Truth do I expect to find while wearing it?

I wonder how Mary Baker Eddy expected people to use this Glossary. Were the newbies supposed to flip to it while reading the book, in order to understand her text? Or was it meant as an explanation of sorts of Christian Science, a cheat-sheet? I ask that because I didn’t know what Thummim and Urim (MBE definitions) are or how they apply to the book or Christian Science. They seem sort of plopped in here without context or explanation. 

• Thummim (OneLook definition)
• Urim (OneLook definition)

Day 294: Power Definitions

591:5-593:8

This reading has the major definitions in Christian Science: Man, Matter, Mind, Miracle, and Mortal Mind on page 591.

In the definition of Mind, Mary Baker Eddy uses substance but with a lower-case s. Is this a typo? Substance is one of the synonyms for God and is usually upper-cased. My book is ISBN 0-87952-259-3 and is last released in 2000.

I’m thinking of creating another page for this site that would link up the words in the Glossary to their location over on Spirituality.com. The link to the page would show up in the right-hand upper side, along with the links for Home, About, etc. Thoughts?

Day 292: Heaven & Hell

587:9-589:7

There seem to be a lot of definitions for God and error in the glossary – different shades, different meanings – but the same overall concept. I didn’t expect that. This reading includes Heaven and Hell below:

HEAVEN. Harmony; the reign of Spirit; government by divine Principle; spirituality; bliss; the atmosphere of Soul.

HELL. Mortal belief; error; lust; remorse; hatred; revenge; sin; sickness; death; suffering and self-destruction; self-imposed agony; effects of sin; that which "worketh abomination or maketh a lie."

But why did Mary Baker Eddy include the word in?

IN. A term obsolete in Science if used with reference to Spirit, or Deity.

Was she referring to God in Man, soul in body? Then the definition from a Christian Science perspective, makes sense. But, wow, the concept had to have been, maybe it still is, so fundamental to other religions that she felt the need to include “in” and then say it was obsolete.

Day 290: God & the Devil

583:10-585:8

These two terms, defined, are a great way to look at Christian Science and my own spiritual growth:

CREATOR. Spirit; Mind; intelligence; the animating divine Principle of all that is real and good; self-existent Life, Truth, and Love; that which is perfect and eternal; the opposite of matter and evil, which have no Principle; God, who made all that was made and could not create an atom or an element the opposite of Himself.

DEVIL. Evil; a lie; error; neither corporeality nor mind; the opposite of Truth; a belief in sin, sickness, and death; animal magnetism or hypnotism; the lust of the flesh, which saith: "I am life and intelligence in matter. There is more than one mind, for I am mind,-- a wicked mind, self-made or created by a tribal god and put into the opposite of mind, termed matter, thence to reproduce a mortal universe, including man, not after the image and likeness of Spirit, but after its own image."

Day 289: Two-fold definitions

581:8-583:9

I’ve read the Glossary before but, honestly, by this point in the book, on a marathon read, my attention and understanding just weren’t there. But that was before. This is a new, fresh, slower read.

I didn’t realize that some of the terms had two-fold meanings: one spiritual, one material. Of course, it makes sense but when I read the definition of Benjamin (Jacob’s son), I had to read it twice. Then I really slowed down. I didn’t want to miss any tiny nugget that was hiding in a two-part definition.

I thought the definition of believing was wonderful. I added “page 582” to the index for belief. I know Mary Baker Eddy spends some time working through belief, faith, and understanding in the book but the last two aren’t in the glossary so that just means belief, to me, is really the key.

I’ve been thinking about marriage a lot lately so I noted the Bride and Bridegroom spiritual nuggets: spiritual bliss and spiritual understanding.

And, mom-that-I-am, I marked the spiritual meaning of children:

The spiritual thoughts and representatives of Life, Truth, and Love.

Day 224: Guidance

443-445:18

This is the first day of Teaching Christian Science. The two ideas that struck me were Mary Baker Eddy’s tone and her clear guidance. Some places in the book, she is very forceful but in these two pages, I didn’t read that. I read compassion and guidance, as if she were speaking to me in a class.

Right off the bat, she says:

under ordinary circumstances a resort to faith in corporeal means tends to deter those, who make such a compromise, from entire confidence in omnipotent Mind as really possessing all power.

There are other places in the book where she says this differently but you get her general attitude here.

There are so many rules listed in these two pages, I was thinking about making a list but I wouldn’t want anyone to stray into the argument of the letter versus the spirit of the rule.

She does discusses the ethics of Christian Science and mentions mental assassins then defines the term:

mental assassins: someone who attempts to kill morally and physically

Day 164: Word Smith

320:4-322:2

Today's reading covers literal versus figurative interpretations of the bible and how that applies to Christian Science. I marked Mary Baker Eddy's own interpretation of a passage in the bible:

The one important interpretation of Scripture is the spiritual. For example, the text, "In my flesh shall I see God," gives a profound idea of the divine power to heal the ills of the flesh, and encourages mortals to hope in Him who healeth all our diseases; whereas this passage is continually quoted as if Job intended to declare that even if disease andworms destroyed his body, yet in the latter days he should stand in celestial perfection before Elohim, still clad in material flesh,--an interpretation which is just the opposite of the true, as may be seen by studying the book of Job.

I don't have anything to add. I just like to see Mary Baker Eddy's interpretation.

Day 108: Soul and Man

209:5-211:6

These are the ideas that struck me in this reading. Mary Baker Eddy defined Spiritual sense in contrast to her explanations of material sense.

Spiritual sense is a conscious, constant capacity to understand God. 

A constant capacity to understand God is, to me, a capacity to love man. They aren't exactly the same idea but something I read a while back in the book made me equate loving God to loving man so I wonder if understanding God is really about understanding Man as the reflection of God. If we had the constant ability to love our neighbor and see them as the child of God, would that be spiritual sense?


This next sentence caught my attention because so many Christian religions argue about Soul: soul in the body, soul leaving the body, purpose of  soul.

Knowing that Soul and its attributes were forever manifested through man...

Soul manifested through man to me is sort of another way of saying man reflects God. But what about Soul's attributes? I looked up Soul in Recapitual( pg 477, line, 19). Soul is defined as

the substance , Life, and intelligence of man.

Vocabulary word:
Solecism

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.

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.

Day 55

102:1-104:2

Today's two pages covers a lot of ground. I had to read it twice and I might have another go at it. Here are some words that I don't automatically think of as meaning the same thing but clearly Mary Baker Eddy means they are, or at least very related:

magnetism
hypnotism
mutual influence
attraction
mesmerism

The first sentence I underlined is:

There is but one real attraction, that of Spirit.

Attraction is an idea so widely used in popular culture. When I think about it, it means starting new friendships or relationships to me -- what keeps people together. So to put it in the above context, I think back to the chapter on Marriage, and how I need to make sure that those relationships are superseded by God and not the other way around. I know MBE is taking a stronger, harsher view of animal magnetism than that -- after the last chapter on One God, I get that -- just putting it in perspective for myself.

The next sentence I stayed with was:

The planets have no more power over man than over his Maker, since God governs the universe; but man, reflecting God's power, has dominion over all the earth and its hosts.

I mentally changed the word planets to flowers because my body wants to believe in allergies. Allergies seem like the ultimate hypnotic dream to me. The boogy man in the closet I can't see.

The next one:

The destruction of the claims of mortal mind through Science, by which man can escape from sin and mortality, blesses the whole human family.

The whole human family is something I need to focus on. Not me, or we, but all. This was a nice way for MBE to say it.

She defines animal magnetism or hypnotism:

As named in Christian Science, animal magnetism or hypnotism is the specific term for error, or mortal mind. It is the false belief that mind is in matter, and is both evil and good; that evil is as real as good and more powerful.

Sometimes, I wish the Glossary or the Index did a better job of tracking definitions like this. But I just make notes on the back pages of what is defined where. Much easier with tags in an online blog. Yeah!

The last one:

In Christian Science, man can do no harm, for scientific thoughts are true thoughts, passing from God to man.

Goal for today: realize and understand true thoughts from God -- God's dominion, not flowers dominion.

Day 51

93:21-95:27

There are so many lines of thought in this chapter regarding spirits that I either didn't know existing or just ignored because it was stupid or didn't make sense to me. However, Mary Baker Eddy spends time explaining them and refuting them. So I'm catching up on spirit theory - if you will.

These two pages start with a great summation of Christian Science thought. It's a big paragraph but it is so clear that I need to remember it:

The belief that Spirit is finite as well as infinite has darkened all history. In Christian Science, Spirit, as a proper noun, is the name of the Supreme Being. It means quantity and quality, and applies exclusively to God. The modifying derivatives of the word spirit refer only to quality, not to God. Man is spiritual. He is not God, Spirit. If man were Spirit, then men would be spirits, gods. Finite spirit would be mortal, and this is the error embodied in the belief that the infinite can be contained in the finite. This belief tends to becloud our apprehension of the kingdom of heaven and the reign of harmony in the Science of being.

Then she goes on to discuss how the ability to read people's thoughts, as Jesus does, was on a scientific basis and necessary to provide a healing:

Jesus could injure no one by his Mind-reading.

This kind of mind-reading is not clairvoyance, but it is important to success in healing, and is one of the special characteristics thereof.

I'm not sure if this is comparing Jesus to the medium or the spirit but I get the point. The next passage I underlined is my favorite of the these pages:

We welcome the increase in knowledge and the end of error, because even human invention must have its day, and we want that day to be succeeded by Christian Science, by divine reality.

Even human invention must have its day - sort of a nice thought for someone in my line of work.

I've been thinking a lot about the higher concept passages. I looked at a star in the sky last night and wondered what idea it was. I understand it's not just one single point but is a fully formed idea with subtleties and complexities - but still - what was the idea.