Hymning

Be Thou, Oh God, exalted high;
And as Thy glory fills the sky,
So let it be on earth displayed,
Till Thou art here and now obeyed.

My very dear friend Valerie recently gave me a shiny blue copy of the Christian Science Hymnal (words only). I keep it here at my desk, and have been reading a few of the poems every day.

The above, the first one in the book, is one of my absolute faves. I love belting it out at the top of my lungs in wide open spaces. I love jazzing it up with some country-western twangs and slurs. I love giving it all the spirit my soul can muster.

I'm going to take the hymns on my run today. It's great to have one running through my head to help me get cadence to my step.

What's your favorite hymn?

Have a great weekend!

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Poetry
  
• Books
  
• SpiritualPractice
  
• Art
  

God and Mother Teresa

Perhaps you've all seen the press on Mother Teresa. My heart breaks for her—and typically, I’m not coming to the same conclusion that anyone else apparently is. [To my friend MT (who ironically shares the same initials as Mother Teresa), if you're reading this, you're going to find it very irritating. Suggest skipping it if you haven't yet had your breakfast.]

Early in Mother Teresa's career, she experienced a direct dialog with Christ Jesus. He tasked her with helping people in India. In the ecstasy of this moment, she accepted wholeheartedly, most likely expecting Jesus would continue at her side throughout. But she did not receive any further visitations from her Lord. She yearned for this presence, but never found it again.

What she did go on to do was establish an organization that helped thousands. When accepting her Nobel Peace Prize, she said, "... radiating joy is real … because Christ [is] in our hearts, Christ in the poor we meet, Christ in the smile we give and in the smile that we receive."

Feel free to disagree here anytime, but in this story I do not see someone cut off from God. If I may be so bold as to say this, what I'm seeing is someone who moved beyond a personal sense of Deity without knowing it. All the arguments about Mother Teresa seem to stem from the fact that she no longer saw Jesus. She had always been taught and firmly believed that Jesus is God, so to her, this was the equivalent of no longer being connected with God. Yet her own words reveal an understanding of Christ as a spiritual concept, in fact omnipresent. It just wasn't the Christ she longed for.

And that is why my heart breaks for her. Her own Godlikeness moved her forward spiritually to the point that what she yearned for she could no longer have. She continued to yearn for it, though, all her life. It was her central tragedy, and she had no tools to assuage it.

I relate to this in a small way. A lot of my spiritual story revolves around seeking approval from a church institution that is incapable of giving it in the way I need it. I've had to learn to do without that approval and find a more direct line to divine acceptance—at the moment, I'm going it alone as a way to sort this out. The desire for institutional approval may continue to be a thorn in my side for the rest of my life, but the human struggle is unrelated to my actual connection to Love. I know I'll awake to the true facts and be free from the struggle one day.

I deeply pray that this is the case for Mother Teresa. I so hope that what she found when she crossed over was a spiritualized concept of God that conveyed to her the loving truth that He had always, always been there with her, for every footstep she took, every brow she bathed, every mouth she fed. She was never alone—she always had her Lord.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• CurrentEvents
  
• WebFinds
  
• Christianity
  
• Inspiration
  
• Visions
  

Q: More on free will and choice

I love a conversation when everyone's right.

Here are the comments from the blog entry on free will:

Anonymous #1 said...

Thanks, Laura, for your interesting thoughts on free will—they’ve given us a lot to think about! I’m not sure that I entirely agree that the concept of free will is incompatible with Christian Science. There are several instances in Science and Health where Mrs. Eddy seems to stress the importance of good human decisions. She says, for example, “Your decisions will master you, whichever direction they take.” Also, “How important, then, to choose good as the reality!” And, “The point for each one to decide is, whether it is mortal mind or immortal Mind that is causative.” And, “To decide quickly as to the proper treatment of error--whether error is manifested in forms of sickness, sin, or death--is the first step towards destroying error.” It seems that, in the relative at least, we do have choices and they can be quite consequential in our spiritual growth. I’d be interested in your take on this.

Anonymous #2 said...

good points, Anon, but in my observation of mortals, even tho they think they have free will, they do not; captured as they are by Animal Magnetism in one of its multifarious forms: food, money, television, internet, games, gambling, sex...etc.
-ObiDon

Another anonymous! said...

My two cents worth:
It is logical to assume that God has free-will. Right?
Then, if so, man, created in God’s likeness, at least has the LIKENESS of free-will—call it what you will.

For the record, I'm so okay with people posting anonymously! And, as is my wont, I agree with everyone.

Yes, as Anon #3 says, God has free will. Definitely. Actually, by definition, what God does equals the divine will. What He does is like Himself. And, if He does it, it's good. According to Christian Science, He's only going to do things that align with Principle, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Life, Truth, Love. God only does that which is real. He's not going to somehow stray outside His own existence to do something that supposititiously exists there. Nothing exists outside of God's being for Him to do.

Likewise, in an absolute spiritual sense, we exist in alignment with the divine will because there's really nothing else. Anon #1 talks above about the relative. I love that passage from Science and Health about choosing good as the reality. We do have an impact on the relative—this mortal seeming—when we choose good. We're not changing absolute existence, but we are bringing the relative in line with it. And, being captured by evil, as ObiDon says, is indeed a form of giving up your freedom of choice to something that enslaves you.

But another point I'd like to make is the infinite number of good "choices" there are, and the comparatively limited number of bad choices. For example, I can choose to be a lawyer, an entertainer, a dancer, a bowler, a mother, a restaurateur, a traveler, a mechanic, a physicist, an accountant… That list is truly infinite. And, I can choose to do more than one of these things, or switch off over time and try different things… In my own career on this planet I've already been a clerk, a secretary, a word processing coordinator, a marketing associate, a mother, an editor, a manager, a librarian, a practitioner, a volunteer, a freelancer… It could be that as we grow spiritually, we'll do everything, one after the other. There is infinite good to be expressed. I can express God fully in a myriad number of equally valid settings or activities. There's no limit to good!

We tend to think of bad and good choices as equal in weight and attractiveness. But they're not. There's so much more good to choose—the preponderance even in this world is good. Most of us spend 99.99% of our time being good—productive, harmonious, loving. We get distracted by that 0.01%, and it's true we should try to dispel it. But it's not all, or even the most, that we are. And to me, the bad choices, the ones that would limit me, have become less and less attractive as I've explored all these gazillion other choices.

Look at your own life. How much good have you done already? That has been your expression of the divine "free will," and you've been aligned with the Divine every second.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Conversations
  
• Character
  
• Identity
  

Q: Shedding light on the "in" thing

I *loved* this comment from Amanda in response to the "There is no 'in'" posting, wanted to share it:

Two things.... I think some of the things to consider about reflection are that you cannot have a reflection without an original, and you cannot have a reflection with no connection to the original. There is no separation between reflection and original, they are inextricably linked, they coexist.

And I find it helpful to think of rays of light as being a metaphor for Spirit's emanations. If you have a room that is lit up with sunlight, where is the sunlight? Is it IN the room? If you close the curtains, do you still have a room full of sunlight? The sunlight is a manifestation of the sun and this sense if is not IN the room, although it is expressed in the room.

I think this helps to explain how Spirit and its manifestations are in and of Spirit, inherent in Spirit and not "in" anything else.

Don't know if this helps.

Amanda

Amanda, it sure helped me! Thanks so much for sharing.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Conversations
  
• Inspiration
  
• Metaphysics
  
• ChristianScience
  

Q: What about free will?

This came in response to the August 16 posting, Treatment and the Lord's Prayer:

You say, with logic from your class notes re The Lord’s Prayer, that “it is divine law that its will is done.” This sounds lovely and assures perfect harmony.

Unfortunately, however, I presume, it is not divine law that “only” divine law be known by man. We seem to have the capacity to observe—even invent—our own laws that govern the universe. We have free-will in what we will think.

Having free-will in our thinking can have some drawbacks, but this too is God’s good will, isn’t it?

CS offers some good training. Thanks for sharing your class notes with us.

See, here's the thing. Christian Science actually doesn't include the concept of free will. The question is: Free will to do what? What else is there but God?

In Christian Science, God is all. There is nothing outside God. There is nothing to know outside of God. All creation is governed by His will.

Consequently, that which aligns with God's will is genuine, actual, real. That which is contrary to His will is unreal, delusional, nothing. Our seeming ability to think, live, and act outside of the divine will is a dream, an illusion. In an absolute spiritual sense, we do not have any such ability.

We walk in this day-to-day, apparently sharing a dream with each other. Humanity has tried to explain existence here through various means, including things like the doctrine of free will. But human explanations all stem from the same initial false premise—that the material universe is real and was created by God. Christian Science, however, takes the position that God, Spirit, could not have created anything so unlike Himself. Like produces like, creation is the image and likeness of the Creator. Our walk here is, if anything, symbolic, but it is not the substance of reality in its true form.

If you appear to be able choose evil and you do so, you're really just spinning your wheels. You've chosen unreality, so of course it will eventually demonstrate its unreality by turning to dust. You'll find that you actually chose nothing, which is the practical equivalent of not having chosen at all.

Reality will remain, the only choice available. Since it's the only choice, it's not really a choice at all. It just is. It's all you've got. Hence, no free will—only reality.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Metaphysics
  
• Conversations
  
• ChristianScience
  

Q: Confusing the body

Wanted to respond to an email from Irene, which came in about my entry on August 14, Uplifting the "corporeal personality."

I had written:

The body responds to a consciousness filled with God's qualities. In my view, if that's the way you want to go, medication (meaning pills or drugs) might just confuse the body and get in the way of its quick and effective alignment with the Divine. You're sending it mixed signals. If you want the fastest results, stick with one or the other.

Irene replied:

I was reading about your class notes on medicine/ or NOT taking medicine. I cannot understand how medicine or anything material at all could interfere with the messages from Mind since matter has no life or intelligence; neither the body nor the medicine. How could lifeless, unthinking, unknowing matter cause confusion or be confused in the first place? Doesn't Divine Mind have a clear field? Ultimate supremacy?

Irene, you're right. Matter has no life or intelligence of its own. It is, however, the cumulative, aggregate and collective manifestation of our concept about it.

From what I understand of Christian Science (please, anyone else feel free to weigh in here), divine Mind has no direct knowledge of matter or the body at all. Messages from Mind are not going to the material body. Mind's messages are going to our individual and collective consciousness, and this in turn shapes the material universe, the body and all their conditions.

When I've used metaphysical treatment to shape the conditions of my body, it's been my experience that it works best if I do not also use physical treatment because this would be employing opposites. Perhaps I was too figurative in what I said in my blog entry—it's not the body that becomes confused, it's the mashup in the associated consciousness that becomes a bit jumbled.

Also, when using metaphysics, you have to be especially certain to put as much weight in that direction as you can mentally, because there is a wide world out there of human consciousness that believes otherwise and has to be counteracted.

Check this out from Mary Baker Eddy:

The universal belief in physics weighs against the high and mighty truths of Christian metaphysics. This erroneous general belief, which sustains medicine and produces all medical results, works against Christian Science; and the 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 human mind acts more powerfully to offset the discords of matter and the ills of flesh, in proportion as it puts less weight into the material or fleshly scale and more weight into the spiritual scale. Science and Health

You'll only get better results by relying 100% on metaphysical treatment in the instances when you choose to do so. This isn't to say that partial reliance is wrong—any step toward Spirit is a step upward. I just think that there comes a point in each individual's path where spiritual truth becomes more real and effective than material practices, so it's at that point it would be natural to turn to it first and completely. This point is different for everyone and can't be dictated by someone else. But we'll all get there.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Healing
  
• ChristianScience
  
• Treatment
  
• Conversations
  
  

Q: There is no "in"

This comment came in response to the "If something is real, its opposite is not. Pick one" entry from August 9.

I sometimes wonder how Mrs. Eddy concluded Spirit to be omnipresent, yet not be in It’s reflection. Have I missed a turn somewhere in her logic? I would think all reflection to be the animation of Spirit.

Fascinating! This led me to do a quick search on the term "not in" in Science and Health. (If you're doing this in the Concord computer program, you need to put quote marks around the exact phrase in the search box. Otherwise you'll get a huge list of every citation that does not have the word "in" in it.)

After reading through and contemplating the search results on "not in," it seems to me that Mary Baker Eddy is being firm on the point that Spirit is not in matter. Spirit cannot be contained within something finite. This refutes the common theological view that Spirit somehow inhabits material forms as a way to express itself or to enact the divine will.

Here are some of the passages I found this morning (there were 50 total), along with my customary comment or two.

The identity, or idea, of all reality continues forever; but Spirit, or the divine Principle of all, is not in Spirit's formations. Soul is synonymous with Spirit, God, the creative, governing, infinite Principle outside of finite form, which forms only reflect. p. 71:5

The forms that we see and feel all around us are not created or inhabited by Spirit. They are the outward manifestations of our own limited concept of reality. For this reason, they are malleable, subjective. You know how people sometimes say that misfortunes are God's will and therefore we should accept them? By understanding that Spirit is never in matter, you can instead fight misfortune as not in line with the divine will, and by changing your own concept, you can change the outward manifestation. This is therefore a vital point to understand for healing.

Along these lines, check out what MBE has to say here:

Science reveals Spirit, Soul, as not in the body, and God as not in man but as reflected by man. The greater cannot be in the lesser. The belief that the greater can be in the lesser is an error that works ill. This is a leading point in the Science of Soul, that Principle is not in its idea. Spirit, Soul, is not confined in man, and is never in matter. p. 467:17-23

Here's a place where she explores the mirror metaphor:

Spirit is God, Soul; therefore Soul is not in matter. If Spirit were in matter, God would have no representative, and matter would be identical with God. The theory that soul, spirit, intelligence, inhabits matter is taught by the schools. This theory is unscientific. The universe reflects and expresses the divine substance or Mind; therefore God is seen only in the spiritual universe and spiritual man, as the sun is seen in the ray of light which goes out from it. God is revealed only in that which reflects Life, Truth, Love, — yea, which manifests God's attributes and power, even as the human likeness thrown upon the mirror, repeats the color, form, and action of the person in front of the mirror. p. 300:23

The mirror, of course, is the metaphor for reflection. Our reflection in the mirror has no substance of its own, and we are not in the reflection even though it is an exact likeness of us. Likewise, God's reflection (you and me) does not contain bits and pieces of Him, even though it (us) is the exact image and likeness of His being. God is not fragmented into a material or physical creation. He exists whole, perfect, in the spiritual universe, and it is spiritual man who is the reflection.

This next passage explains this point further:

A picture in the camera or a face reflected in the mirror is not the original, though resembling it. Man, in the likeness of his Maker, reflects the central light of being, the invisible God. As there is no corporeality in the mirrored form, which is but a reflection, so man, like all things real, reflects God, his divine Principle, not in a mortal body. p. 305:5

I bring up these points to lay the foundation of what MBE has said about the "in" concept. Now, to the original comment.

To my mind, "in" is only a concept that we need when we're thinking in material, spacial terms. Where there is no space, no three (or more) dimensions to define existence, there is no "in."

Trippy, eh? In the same way that you can have more than one idea in your thought at the same time, the spiritual universe can contain all that is itself in no space and all space. In spiritual reality, there is no "in," because there can be no "out." All is one.

Right now, we are as "in" it as we've ever been, and will ever be. It is only the illusion of materiality that keeps us from seeing in these terms.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• ChristianScience
  
• MaryBakerEddy
  
• Metaphysics
  
• Conversations
  

Q: Jehovah, Elohim, what's the dif?

Today's question is from the same blog reader who asked Monday's question.

I was reading Science and Health when I read that Jehovah God is the tribal God of the Hebrews and not the Almighty God we worship today. That disturbed me so much that I closed the book and have not read it again. Please, comment on these facts. Thanks.

Thanks, another great question. To sort this one out requires context.

It's well to remember the full title of the book when reading Science and Health—it's Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. Throughout Science and Health, Mary Baker Eddy writes about the Bible from a scholarly point of view. She was herself a deep Bible scholar. She could read it in the original, and was well versed in Bible commentary and in history. She was therefore qualified to comment on Biblical issues from the perspective of what these issues must have meant to the early Hebrews or Christians during Biblical times.

For example, in a section such as this one, from the chapter on Genesis:

It may be worth while here to remark that, according to the best scholars, there are clear evidences of two distinct documents in the early part of the book of Genesis. One is called the Elohistic, because the Supreme Being is therein called Elohim. The other document is called the Jehovistic, because Deity therein is always called Jehovah, — or Lord God, as our common version translates it.

Throughout the first chapter of Genesis and in three verses of the second, — in what we understand to be the spiritually scientific account of creation, — it is Elohim (God) who creates. From the fourth verse of chapter two to chapter five, the creator is called Jehovah, or the Lord. The different accounts become more and more closely intertwined to the end of chapter twelve, after which the distinction is not definitely traceable. In the historic parts of the Old Testament, it is usually Jehovah, peculiarly the divine sovereign of the Hebrew people, who is referred to. Science and Health

To me, when MBE is discussing the use of the term Jehovah in Science and Health, she's exposing for further thought the limited concept of the Divine as evident in those early chapters of the Bible, juxtaposed against the higher concept of Elohim. She is not discussing what a person might mean today when they use the term Jehovah. When someone uses that term today, they may in fact mean something closer to Elohim, the God of Love and light revealed in the New Testament. When reading MBE's works, though, it's good to keep in mind her context of discussing what those words meant in early Bible times.

Here's her definition of Lord God from the Glossary—again, this chapter in Science and Health is specifically meant to define Biblical terms for use in gaining a deeper understanding when reading the Bible.

LORD GOD. Jehovah.

This double term is not used in the first chapter of Genesis, the record of spiritual creation. It is introduced in the second and following chapters, when the spiritual sense of God and of infinity is disappearing from the recorder's thought, — when the true scientific statements of the Scriptures become clouded through a physical sense of God as finite and corporeal. From this follow idolatry and mythology, — belief in many gods, or material intelligences, as the opposite of the one Spirit, or intelligence, named Elohim, or God. Science and Health

See how the wording is explored to give greater meaning to the Biblical text? I'm only emphasizing this so that we can sort out the difference between what MBE is saying about the use of the word Jehovah in the Bible from what a person today might mean when using the word to describe Almighty God. If you use MBE's ideas when reading the Bible, you will gain a deeper understanding of what the text meant to those who wrote it.

MBE also comments on the "Jewish concept," which I've heard some objections to as proving she was anti-Semitic. However, it's my belief that she's not criticizing today's Jews in any way. My reading of her words tells me that she's giving an explication of the Jews of the Bible, not those of today. Here's an example:

The Jewish conception of God, as Yawah, Jehovah, or only a mighty hero and king, has not quite given place to the true knowledge of God. Creeds and rituals have not cleansed their hands of rabbinical lore. To-day the cry of bygone ages is repeated, "Crucify him!" At every advancing step, truth is still opposed with sword and spear. Science and Health

I think when she's talking about the "Jewish conception" of Yawah having not given place to the true knowledge of God, she's meaning this for all of us, and not as a specific comment on today's Jewish thinkers. She's warning us all to uplift our concept of the Divine to something higher than a potentate or warrior-like god. She's saying there is too much creed and ritual in all forms of religion, and not enough truth. And she's saying this reliance on creed and ritual continues the crucifixion of the truth to this day.

In this next passage, to me MBE is talking about the trajectory of increased spiritual understanding that courses through the entire Bible from start to finish. Again, I believe the "Jewish concept" she's referring to is that of the Old Testament, and is not a comment on today's Jewish worshipper.

The term Lord, as used in our version of the Old Testament, is often synonymous with Jehovah, and expresses the Jewish concept, not yet elevated to deific apprehension through spiritual transfiguration. Yet the word gradually approaches a higher meaning. This human sense of Deity yields to the divine sense, even as the material sense of personality yields to the incorporeal sense of God and man as the infinite Principle and infinite idea, — as one Father with His universal family, held in the gospel of Love. Science and Health

"… the word gradually approaches a higher meaning…" in the Bible. As you read the Bible from cover to cover, you can see how "…the human sense of Deity yields to the divine sense…" She's talking about the Bible and how it shows the advancement of human thought about the Divine. The Divine did not change—our concept of the Divine has grown.

Mary Baker Eddy was committed to helping people read the Bible with greater understanding. I myself have found through studying MBE's words that the Bible holds very little mystery to me—just a wealth of inspiration and hope. I read the words and I understand because of what Christian Science has taught me. It's important to remember MBE's goal in her explanation of Biblical terms. She was not trying to undermine other teachings or criticize, but to provide a key to unlock the truths of the Bible—and promote greater understanding for all of us.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Bible
  
• MaryBakerEddy
  
• ChristianScience
  
• Conversations
  

Q: More on "dying young"

I was going to answer another question today, but the comments on yesterday's entry were too interesting to pass up. Food for thought!

From Dennis:

I do not have a problem leaving this mortal dream, but I do not want to do it on error's terms.

If it is time, why can't we just make the transition without being riddled with disease?

One of my favorite Bible characters is Enoch. He walked with God and was translated without disease. I feel that is our goal.

From Anonymous:

I liked Dennis' comment; and I like the word "translated," which I think may have to do with a clearer form of understanding—like when a language is translated for us and we have some new understanding of what formerly was confusing sounds.

Here's a verse from Isaiah I ran across long ago that may be appropriate to include as a comment:

Isaiah 57:1-2 (New Living Translation)
1 Good people pass away; the godly often die before their time.
But no one seems to care or wonder why.
No one seems to understand that God is protecting them from the evil to come.
2 For those who follow godly paths
will rest in peace when they die.

From Robert:

Good topic.

Several years ago I had a delightful conversation with a woman in her late 80's who was one of those folks everyone is just drawn to because she loved everyone. She made you feel special. The next day at 5:30 AM she was found dead in her bed. Since she lived in a retirement community, the residents spoke of her departure with great admiration. No lingering, no suffering. An exit we all wish for ourselves. A few years later I discovered she was a Christian Scientist and that was in no way a small incentive for me to look into Christian Science. Several months ago I discovered Mindy Jostyn's "In His Eyes" on a TMCYouth podcast and was dismayed to find this woman died way too young. But listening to her 2 albums I got from the reading room I can see how she fulfilled an extraordinary mission of creating beautiful, masterful music. When I listen to her music it is like God is singing to me. It is God singing to me! How long does one need to be in a body to accomplish that? How long did Jesus need to be on earth to forever change the world? Hmmmmmm.

Hmmmmmm is right!

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Conversations
  
• Inspiration
  
• Bible
  

Q: Why did she die so young?

I got a lot of great questions in over the last two weeks, I'm just going to take them one at a time. These are just my thoughts—I hope others will also weigh in.

From a new blog reader:

I have just discovered your website, and I'm glad that I did. I have so many questions and issues for you to resolve for me. But here are some baffling ones first.

There used to live a certain [practitioner] who I happened to meet personally, and she resolved some health problems for me and my loved ones. Then, I became very busy and also did not have the need for her. Just recently, I wanted to inquire about her, and to my greatest shock, I learned that she had passed away three years ago. She was not that old, just about 69 yrs old. I could not understand why such a woman that I believe had such wisdom (I might be mistaking) died so early.

Thanks for inquiring! I've heard this or a form of it a lot over the years. There seems to be a general assumption that if one is sufficiently spiritual, one's human life will be longer. Also, the increase in life expectancies in recent years has led people to think more time on this planet is a worthy goal in and of itself.

As a balance, I'd like to present this article from CNN that I stumbled on when thinking about this question.

• Death and dying: When is it time to let go?

After a discussion of extreme measures being taken to extend life as long as possible, the article concludes:

"In the U.S., I don't think we do death very well," said Dr Christina Puchalski of George Washington Hospital. "When people are faced with death, there is a big push on survivorship, to help people stay alive as long as they can. I don't think that's bad, but quality of life has to come into play."

Hospitals have been urging people for years to sign advance directives setting out what treatment they do or don't want near the end of life, but only about 15 percent have done so.

"Most Americans don't really believe they're going to die," [Washington Hospital Center medical director John] Lynch said. "This is where so many of the problems start."

As a person who lives quite outside of the medical world, I wonder sometimes what life would be like if I were dependent on medicine. Many individuals live out their lives tied quite firmly to medical procedures and processes. Others choose not to embark on this kind of dependence, and they live a very different kind of life. Perhaps this is another way to measure the success of a life—how it is lived, rather than merely in calendar years.

So what's my answer to the inquiry? The timing for when our human bodies give out and we move along to the next experience is no reflection of our spirituality. The point is not to stay here indefinitely. What's more important to me is how we lived while we were here.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• SpiritualPractice
  
• Conversations
  
• CNN
  
• WebFinds
  

Use the talent you have

I finished reading through my class notes today, at least the notes we actually covered during the two-week period. What a feast. (There are subsequent notes I still need to cover that were for study after class.)

Here's a wonderful email I received from a blog reader who recently went through class himself:

I took class to address my objections to Christian Science and to decide whether or not I could continue to pursue it. I brought with me the critical inner voice from my [more traditional Christian] fire and brimstone background. These recent 2 weeks were more profound and transformative than I could have hoped for and that inner voice has just evaporated, replaced by a completely different voice that constantly tells me how good I am, how loved I am. I like this voice a lot better and will stick with it.

The intensity of those two weeks will never leave me. It felt like we had covered all of creation, both the real and the unreal. It was a monstrous huge feast on the meat of the Word. So much so that, at the end, it was possible to feel overwhelmed. How could I possibly get any of this done? How could I ever live up to the teaching?

This wonderful encouraging passage was included in the readings for the last day:

To do good to all because we love all, and to use in God's service the one talent that we all have, is our only means of adding to that talent and the best way to silence a deep discontent with our shortcomings. (Mary Baker Eddy, First Church of Christ, Scientist, and Miscellany)

*Sigh*. I found this very comforting. I know I can do good today, I don't need to worry about how much I'll accomplish tomorrow. I can just take it one day at a time, and use my talents as best I can. That's good enough for God.

Class gives you the big picture, and then you can turn to the longer process of developing your spiritual practice from what you've learned. It's not expected that you'll master it all in a day—rather, it's a foundation of metaphysics that can inform all that comes after.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Inspiration
  
• ChristianScience
  
• SpiritualGrowth
  
• SpiritualPractice
  
• Encouragement
  

Treatment and the Lord's Prayer

Today's readings in my class notes were about treatment. Just a wonderful topic, of course.

Class, as you may know, is based on the question-and-answer chapter Recapitulation in Science and Health. The question about treatment includes a discussion of how Jesus healed. So, my class notes include a deep dive into the prayer that Jesus gave us, the Lord's Prayer, which Mary Baker Eddy wrote indicates the "heaven-born aspiration and spiritual consciousness" that can instantaneously heal the sick.

Here's the Lord's Prayer with its spiritual sense given in Science and Health, along with headings that indicate one way the prayer can be used in treatment.

One Cause

Our Father which art in heaven,
Our Father-Mother God, all-harmonious,

Nature of Cause

Hallowed be Thy name.
Adorable One.

Effect of Cause

Thy kingdom come.
Thy kingdom is come; Thou art ever-present.

Divine Law

Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
Enable us to know, — as in heaven, so on earth, — God is omnipotent, supreme.

Appropriation—Law in Action

Give us this day our daily bread;
Give us grace for to-day; feed the famished affections;

Perfect Man—Recipient of Law

And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
And Love is reflected in love;

Enforcement of Law

And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil;
And God leadeth us not into temptation, but delivereth us from sin, disease, and death.

Perfection of God and His Image

For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever.
For God is infinite, all-power, all Life, Truth, Love, over all, and All.

When you use this prayer in treatment, first you establish what is the universal Cause, the only Creator, divine Life, Truth, Love. You explore the nature of that Cause, and its effect. With that as the only Cause, it is divine law that its will is done, which is goodness, harmony, perfection. This law appropriates harmony to all creation, including man, God's image and likeness. This law is enforced, in action, unbreakable, and you can use this law to destroy sin, disease and death. Perfection is intact, with man as God's image and likeness and free from all evil.

I hope this isn't too vague—after all, I’m not a teacher! This is just what it meant to me, and what has been helpful to me in the years since then. You can always find out more by taking class yourself.

One last bit on my class notes tomorrow, then next week I'll address some of the questions that have come in.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• ChristianScience
  
• Bible
  
• Prayer
  
• Treatment
  

The yucky stuff—time to clean up

Yesterday and this morning the readings from my class notes covered the yucky stuff—animal magnetism, malpractice, mesmerism, hypnotism. One big lump of yucky. And there's really only one way to deal with it all, and that's to see that it's nothing.

Sometimes it's frustrating when you know something is animag, but you see a loved one or colleague in the throes of it. They may be either harming themselves or others through a mesmeric attachment to a particular idea or course of action. They may be trapped by a fear that you no longer have or never had. They may be in the clutches of a desire that will only lead to misery, or a limitation that threatens to stall them out.

You could argue with them verbally, try to get them to see the logic of your perspective. You could try to force them to accept the way you feel is right. You could withhold respect or affection in an attempt to coerce cooperation. Hmmm. How many of these are likely to work?

-OR-

You could see through the lie to the truth of their being.

This way is harder. It requires you to refute the evidence of your ears and eyes. It demands a deep commitment to only acknowledging spiritual reality. It insists that the loved one or colleague is perfect NOW, and nothing has or can change that. And it mandates that you, yourself, dig deep and take responsibility for your own concept of that person.

You are what you see. If you're seeing the false concept in another, in a way you're accepting it for yourself. This is exactly what animag would have us do. It's the only thing that gives animag its power—if we consent to it and agree that it's real. If we refuse to consent, if we are certain of its unreality, we stop it in its tracks. It can go no farther. And, we may even have provided the counterfact to destroy it, even for the other person.

All the good stuff about Christian Science gives us the cleaning tools we need to refute and destroy the yucky effects of animag. Those tools, which are good, are infinite. We can never run out of them, they are abundant and omnipresent. They're like a divine spritzer, which washes away the dirt and leaves only the shine.

Not so yucky anymore. Squirt!

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• AniMag
  
• Character
  
• SpiritualPractice
  
• Identity
  

Uplifting the "corporeal personality"

My readings for today from my class notes covered the use of medicine. Or, should I say, the not-use. (For those of you tuning in now, I've been reading through my notes from Christian Science class instruction since August 6, in support of the instruction that is going on around the world this summer. I plan to get through all the notes in these two weeks.)

In the many times I've gone through these notes since class, I always find myself approaching this section with trepidation. I'm afraid to discover that I'm off base somehow. But then I read along and find that I'm still in synch with what I was taught, which is always a relief!

I also find something new every time, not surprisingly. Here are some passages that spoke to me (all from Mary Baker Eddy's writings).

He who gains the God-crowned summit of Christian Science never abuses the corporeal personality, but uplifts it. (Retrospection and Introspection)

To me, this one spoke to the practice of caring for the body through avoiding those things that might abuse it. The obvious abusers might be alcohol, drugs, etc., but I'm also inclined to include an imbalanced eating pattern that has too many substandard ingredients or a lethargic lifestyle that doesn't hold enough beneficial activity. Everyone has to work this out for themselves, of course, but for me, I feel that as long as this body is under my care, I've got to treat it respectfully. It's a temple, after all.

Christian Science Mind-healing can only be gained by working from a purely Christian standpoint. Then it heals the sick and exalts the race. (No and Yes)

What I loved about this passage is how it explains the point of Christian Science healing. It's not alone to alleviate physical symptoms and to make us comfortable. It exalts the race through its Christian basis. The best healing work I've seen or done has included the beneficiary's increased spiritual sense, joy and peace. That's the point, really.

God's preparations for the sick are potions of His own qualities. His therapeutics are antidotes for the ailments of mortal mind and body. Then let us not adulterate His preparations for the sick with material means. (Miscellaneous Writings)

I loved this! Hadn't remembered ever reading it before, although of course I must have, many times. Especially in light of my Harry Potter obsession, the idea of "potions" just made me smile. And it made sense to me that God's qualities are the "potion." We apply a large dose of these qualities to the one who needs healing, and this calms the thought, opens the way for the body to align with health, and adjusts the problem.

I have seen this work on countless occasions with both small issues and large. The body responds to a consciousness filled with God's qualities. In my view, if that's the way you want to go, medication (meaning pills or drugs) might just confuse the body and get in the way of its quick and effective alignment with the Divine. You're sending it mixed signals. If you want the fastest results, stick with one or the other.

Okay, I'm a pragmatist. To me, Christian Science is only worth the paper it's printed on if it works. For me, it always has.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• ChristianScience
  
• Healing
  
• SpiritualPractice
  

The strongest weapon in the battle against evil

First, don't miss the great comments about marriage in response to Friday's entry Is it real, or is it lust? Here are some highlights:

Dennis: It is interesting that the more I am resolved to keep my promise to love my wife, the more attractive she becomes.

Elizabeth (who I know as Betsy): …Certainly doesn't mean my heart doesn't typically skip a beat when I look at my husband sometimes, greet him at the door when he returns from work, hold his hand as we walk along. But it is a quiet contentment, not lusty or hot and heavy. Frankly, I think that would get tiring and dull. But joy and peace, ah! that is wonderful, and it gets you through those bumpy times. [Note: loved this, all the more since I was a bridesmaid at her wedding 22 years ago.]

Emily: …the right mate should have the same qualities as a good road trip partner: Doesn't annoy you too much, doesn't smell too weird, and seems to be heading in roughly the same direction that you're going.

Ha!

The weekend reading I did had some gems I'd like to share today. The section of my class notes I was covering had to do with overcoming sin. (I added the bolding for emphasis; all the passages are from Mary Baker Eddy's writings.)

It is safe not to teach prematurely the infant thought in Christian Science — just breathing new Life and Love — all the claims and modes of evil; therefore it is best to leave the righteous unfolding of error (as a general rule) alone, and to the special care of the unerring modes of divine wisdom. This uncovering and punishing of sin must, will come, at some date, to the rescue of humanity. Miscellaneous Writings

We should endeavor to be long-suffering, faithful, and charitable with all. To this small effort let us add one more privilege — namely, silence whenever it can substitute censure. Avoid voicing error; but utter the truth of God and the beauty of holiness, the joy of Love and "the peace of God, that passeth all understanding," recommending to all men fellowship in the bonds of Christ. Advise students to rebuke each other always in love, as I have rebuked them. Having discharged this duty, counsel each other to work out his own salvation, without fear or doubt, knowing that God will make the wrath of man to praise Him, and that the remainder thereof He will restrain. No and Yes

The real Christian Scientist is constantly accentuating harmony in word and deed, mentally and orally, perpetually repeating this diapason of heaven: "Good is my God, and my God is good. Love is my God, and my God is Love." Miscellaneous Writings

There's a good bit of material in Christian Science literature about rebuking sin. What the above passages mean to me is: this does not include verbal rebuking of a person. Rebuking sin happens in thought, in prayer, by addressing error mentally. There's seldom a need to articulate the rebuke verbally to the person who seems to be needing to work it out—in fact, chastisement often serves to make a person intransigent in sin. (I speak from experience, that's what happened whenever someone chastised me!) Pointing out a person's faults or sins is almost a sure-fire way to make the sin last longer.

Instead, have absolute faith that the person is *not* sinful, and know this in thought with full understanding of their divine nature. Radiate this confidence in their spotless being whenever you interact with or think about them. Voice only good when you talk to them, express your belief in their goodness. I've seen what happens when a mentor switches from well-intentioned chastisement to positive support—I've seen lives turned around. The power of good far outstrips any hold of evil, and you can be a warrior for good if you rely on it as your exclusive weapon against evil.

I feel like doing battle today!

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• AniMag
  
• Character
  
• ChristianScience
  
• Relationships
  
• Conversations
  

Is it real, or is it lust?

Yesterday's readings from my class notes were on morality, specifically marriage. And interestingly, that afternoon my son dropped down at the table near me and asked, "How do you know if you're attracted to someone?" It was one of those really cool parenting moments.

So I launched into a description of qualities I was looking for in a partner, things like happiness, intelligence, openness, affection, etc. Then he clarified that what he meant was, how do you know if it's real or if it's lust? Which of course is an entirely different question!

This gave me pause. I started with an idea that's always meant a lot to me, related to the synonyms of God found in Christian Science (so many things tie back to those seven words). In Christian Science, God is Love and God is Mind. Mind and Love coexist in the same supreme entity and are inextricably linked. So real love to me, even on the human scene, needs to be intelligent. It needs to be rational, it needs to make sense.

I told my son you can choose to be attracted—it's not something that you have no control over. Gone are the days where a mere physical spark will get my attention. I use rational criteria to decide if I want to pursue a relationship with someone. Do our lives blend? Do we share compatible values and aspirations? Does it make sense to team up given our life circumstances? If the circumstances don't make sense, I'm not one to pursue it even if I really like the guy. To me, there's no point in starting something I can't finish.

The Marriage chapter in Science and Health says this: "Kindred tastes, motives, and aspirations are necessary to the formation of a happy and permanent companionship" (p. 60). That sounds to me like there's an obligation to find out about those kindred tastes, motives and aspirations before we jump in.

Lust, then, might be what we feel on a physical level for someone before we've determined whether we're compatible in the emotional or life-goal realms. I think it's hard to lust after someone you really have gotten to know or care about. Sure, you may be crazy for them physically, but I wouldn't call that lust. Lust is about the unknown, about the taking, about the self gratification. Affection, even if it's hot, even if it's orgasmic, between two people who have formed a bond I think is in a different category than lust.

Frankly, I don't know that many people who are walking around feeling or indulging in what I would consider lust. Lust is flat-out sexual hunger with no redeeming features attached to it. Feeling a very strong attraction for someone you care about and are committed to is different, at least in my book.

Would love to hear from you all, especially you married folks. How does attraction fit in to your relationships?

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• ChristianScience
  
• Character
  
• Parenting
  
• Relationships
  
• Conversations
  

If something is real, its opposite is not. Pick one.

Truth is immortal; error is mortal. Truth is limitless; error is limited. Truth is intelligent; error is non-intelligent. Moreover, Truth is real, and error is unreal. This last statement contains the point you will most reluctantly admit, although first and last it is the most important to understand. (Science and Health)

Class instruction solidified a point in Christian Science that had always made sense to me: that if something is real, its opposite is not. Real and unreal are opposites, so the unreal cannot exist where the real occupies the ground. But the unreal by definition doesn't exist anywhere—it's unreal. If a thing exists, it must be real, and its opposite is nowhere. Anything real, therefore, must fill all space. There is no space where the unreal exists, is there? If it's unreal, it doesn't exist, so where is it going to be located? So this means that if it's real, it fills all space, and nothing else can exist besides it.

This is only possible for spiritual things, of course, because material things occupy three dimensions and are limited by definition. Material things don't—can't—fill all space. So it's only spiritual things that can fill all space fully and simultaneously. They're not material, so they don't bump into each other.

Mary Baker Eddy gets at this point that you can't fill all space unless you're spiritual in this passage (bolding added by me):

God is individual, incorporeal. He is divine Principle, Love, the universal cause, the only creator, and there is no other self-existence. He is all-inclusive, and is reflected by all that is real and eternal and by nothing else. He fills all space, and it is impossible to conceive of such omnipresence and individuality except as infinite Spirit or Mind. Hence all is Spirit and spiritual. (Science and Health)

So you can't fill all space unless you're Spirit. But then once you are Spirit, you do fill all space, so there can be nothing outside of Spirit. Matter, therefore, as something outside of Spirit, doesn't exist.

I'll never forget the a-ha of that moment when I really took in the logic of that scenario. I then instantly began to apply it to concepts I was sure were real.

• Spirit. If Spirit is real, matter is not.
• Love. If Love is real, hate is not.
• Life. If Life is real, death is not.
• Intelligence. If intelligence is real, stupidity is not.
• Good. If good is real, evil or bad is not.

Good = Spirit = real. Evil = matter = unreal. Pick one.

Here's what MBE has to say about that:

If sin, sickness, and death were understood as nothingness, they would disappear. As vapor melts before the sun, so evil would vanish before the reality of good. One must hide the other. How important, then, to choose good as the reality! (Science and Health)

I just dig these ideas.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Metaphysics
  
• ChristianScience
  
• Inspiration
  
• AniMag
  

Father and mother: why you can be both

Applied to Deity, Father and Mother are synonymous terms; they signify one God.

--Mary Baker Eddy ('00 5:10-11)

This one sentence, which I read this morning from my class notes, packs a lot of meaning for me. It draws on the concept that in Christian Science, all the many synonyms for God are words for *the same thing.* It's not that there's a God who is Truth, and a God who is Love and a God who is Mind. It's that Truth, Love and Mind are actually equivalent, the same Being, one.

Did you ever have a teacher in grade school who explained what equivalent means? Mine took two paper triangles that were equivalent and laid them on top of each other. They fit perfectly in the same space. Now, in the material world, the two triangles were still distinct. To me, spiritual equivalence means the items are actually one and the same, because not only are they the same size, but they occupy the same space.

"Father" and "mother" are two words that materially we tend to think of as two separate things. Each child physically has a father and a mother. In the physical sense, both of these genders are needed to generate the child. Once you get past conception, though, the gender positions are not so distinct or mandatory. After all, many people grow up without a particular parent present. Does the child then have to do without?

Spiritually, "Father" and "Mother" are names for God. These concepts occupy the same space as Spirit, Love. Today I'm seeing Father and Mother as those equivalent triangles. They are not two sub-sections of God, but they express the totality of God, each of them, together. They equal each other, and they equal the other synonyms as well. It's all one Being of Light.

A concept that I've always loved about Christian Science is that we, you and I, are the image and likeness of God in all His attributes. We don't just express a corner of His being, but the totality. If it's in God, it's in us. So if God is Father-Mother, we, too, express the whole picture, even if our physical role in a child's conception was one or the other.

As I'm approaching the end of my parenting years, at least the years where the children are at home, I can see that they never went without. Both my children are kind, intelligent, loving, hardworking. They express all the qualities that they learned from their father-mother—me. I can see through them that I've been expressing Father-Mother the entire time, because they're turning out whole and strong.

Yes, there are human difficulties stemming from not having a two-parent household. But their core is sound and they are complete. And I am grateful that throughout, I had access to all the qualities I needed as both father and mother to make this family a success.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Parenting
  
• WorkingWithWords
  
• ChristianScience
  
• Identity
  

Petition from a hungry heart

Still thinking about class (see yesterday's entry). I did pull out my notes, which consist of citations from the Bible and Mary Baker Eddy's works that we explored over the 12-day class period. I punched the first day's worth into my Concord computer program yesterday, and went through each one. I'll probably do this every day for this week and next.

Reading these words, I'm struck by two things: The concepts are comfortably familiar yet challengingly fresh, and I truly accept that they are an accurate depiction of reality. It's always illuminating to circle back and dig in again, only to find that I never really wandered. Christian Science is simply the way I think.

Here's a passage from Mary Baker Eddy that my teacher over two decades ago urged us to read every morning:

One thing I have greatly desired, and again earnestly request, namely, that Christian Scientists, here and elsewhere, pray daily for themselves; not verbally, nor on bended knee, but mentally, meekly, and importunately. When a hungry heart petitions the divine Father-Mother God for bread, it is not given a stone, — but more grace, obedience, and love. If this heart, humble and trustful, faithfully asks divine Love to feed it with the bread of heaven, health, holiness, it will be conformed to a fitness to receive the answer to its desire; then will flow into it the "river of His pleasure," the tributary of divine Love, and great growth in Christian Science will follow, — even that joy which finds one's own in another's good. (Miscellaneous Writings 127:7)

The promise of these words still moves me. It seems my love affair with Christian Science heats and cools as my life enters different phases, but Christian Science remains, faithful, there for me, ready for when I come home.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• ChristianScience
  
• Inspiration
  
• SpiritualPractice
  

Bring it all into focus

The Telling the Truth blogger posted a beautiful entry the other week, encapsulating his recent experience with Christian Science class instruction. Please check it out. If you've had class, it will remind you how amazing that time was. If you haven't yet, you may want to consider signing up for next time.

I'm remembering class especially this morning as well. It's like it happened yesterday, although it was over 20 years ago. So much of it is still crystal clear. Like Telling the Truth's experience, it brought everything into focus for me. I'd gone to a Christian Science Sunday School all my life, yet there were still things I didn't understand. Class clarified everything, although I'm still learning new things from that foundation.

The synonyms for God especially came to life for me in class. Before they had been merely words, but class challenged me to go beyond lip service to the ideas to actually applying them and seeing their reality. Love, Truth, Life, Soul, Spirit, Mind, Principle. Just writing them now in the context of remembering class enlarges them in my thought. All in one, they are God, and are the building blocks of reality. This still amazes me.

Today I just want to throw my support to all the classes that are taking place right now, the teachers who are diligently instructing and the pupils who are drinking it in. This will probably be one of the most transformative periods in the pupils' lives. I pray that each one gets what they need, sees the light more clearly, and gains the courage to practice it themselves.

Perhaps I'll break out my class notes again today and see what they still have to teach me. You may hear more about this tomorrow!

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• ChristianScience
  
• Transformation
  
• Gratitude
  
• SpiritualGrowth
  

Wikipedia prayer

Stumbled on the Wikipedia page on prayer the other day, and lo and behold someone had made a point of including specifically Christian Science prayer, right after Christian prayer. Well done, whoever you are!

Seeing it there juxtaposed against all the other descriptions of prayer, I was struck by how out-of-the-box Mary Baker Eddy’s concept of prayer is—at least the prayer that contributes to spiritual healing. Here’s what the page says:

Christian Science teaches that prayer is a spiritualization of thought or an understanding of God and of the nature of the underlying spiritual creation. Adherents believe that this can result in healing, by bringing spiritual reality (the "Kingdom of Heaven" in Biblical terms) into clearer focus in the human scene. The world as it appears to the senses is regarded as a distorted version of the world of spiritual ideas: the latter is the only true reality. Prayer can heal the distortion. Christian Scientists believe that prayer does not change the spiritual creation but gives a clearer view of it, and the result appears in the human scene as healing: the human picture adjusts to coincide more nearly with the divine reality. Prayer works through love: the recognition of God's creation as spiritual, intact and inherently lovable.

Food for thought. How are you praying today?

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• ChristianScience
  
• Prayer
  
• WebFinds
  

More on wealth

Great comment came in from yesterday’s entry, wanted everyone to see it:

Your concluding words are inspirational, saying, “I realize I’ve been wealthy all my life. I’m realizing you don’t have to own something to have it. We’re all on the receiving end of divine abundance.” Well said!

Do you think maybe Jesus had this understanding you’ve gained in mind for his followers when he said, “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also”?

It is easy to say, “Jesus just said these words to a certain rich ruler (which he did, later on) who may have had more riches that he needed,” but the truth is that Jesus said these words to his whole little flock of disciples too, some of whom were middle class fishermen -- certainly not of the wealthy class.

I know [that] a disciple who has sold his or her possessions and given alms with their funds -- and continues in these words -- will be more or less like Ol’ Mother Hubbard with a seemingly empty cupboard, but those “treasures in the heavens that do not fail” are actually packed into that empty cupboard (call it your spiritualized consciousness), and will be overflowing from the invisible as needed. Note, I didn’t say “as wanted.”

Jesus said to his followers regarding the glorifying of his Spirit (the Spirit of truth) following his crucifixion: “He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine, and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take of what is mine, and reveal it to you.” “All that the Father has” -- who could ask for anything more? And it starts out with a willingness to trust in God, and, as you said above, that “you don’t have to own something to have it.”

To the commenter: Thank you so much for posting!

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Abundance
  
• Christianity
  
• Bible
  
• Conversations

Surrogate wealth

Today I’m remembering with a smile a sequence from the movie Pursuit of Happyness. (Wrote about the movie here as well.)

The main character Chris Gardner goes with his son Christopher to see a wealthy potential client who is just headed out the door to a major league football game. Gardner makes a good enough first impression that the man invites him and his boy to see the game with them in their box seats. The little boy has the time of his life at the game, living for those few hours as people who can afford anything can live.

That's happened to me so many times I can't count them. Not a football game, but the experience of the kids and me being invited to enjoy an event or activity I couldn't remotely afford through the invitation of a generous someone who is more well-to-do. I loved those times—they were a total gift. I’ve felt similar gratitude on hiking trails that wind through wealthy neighborhoods. I could enjoy the setting without having to have the house there.

I guess what I'm saying is, I’m grateful this morning for wealthy memories. My little family didn’t always have much disposable income, but we have consistently had wealthy experiences. Sometimes I’ve berated myself for not having been able to provide the unlimited wherewithal myself, but then I remember, hey, I was *raising* the kids. This was my priority. And the kids still had some amazing experiences through loving family and friends. To me, this was an indication of divine Love’s provision for them, and for me. We never really were going without—we were always served with abundance.

Today, as I remember all this, I realize I’ve been wealthy all my life. I’m realizing you don’t have to own something to have it. We’re all on the receiving end of divine abundance.

Your ideas and inspiration are welcome! Please comment below or Contact Laura.
Email this posting to a friend with the envelope icon below.

Del.icio.us tags:

• Abundance
  
• Happiness
  
• Movies
  
• Gratitude
  
• Parenting