 Posted Monday, November 02, 2009 8:23 AM
|
|
|
|
I posted a couple of questions on the christianscience.com discussion forum to a topic entitled, how is caffeine different than alcohol? (#40 and #42). The replies, however, quickly went off topic to testimonies and discussions of Mary Baker Eddy biographies. Not sure anyone understood the question.
The question shouldn't be too tough to understand. Is there now a general acceptance among Christian Scientists that Mary Baker Eddy only discouraged "(t)he depraved appetite for alcoholic drinks, tobacco, tea, coffee, opium"? Do Christian Science teachers now teach that drinking, smoking, and opium use are now acceptable, so long as Christian Scientists do not develop a depraved appetite for them?
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Monday, November 02, 2009 2:35 PM
|
|
|
|
Got a clear response from one of the reliable christianscience.com contributors:
"I'm not aware of any Christian Scientist I know who accepts such an interpretation. I also have not heard or read of any Christian Science teachers who teach this. I certainly hope they don't teach it. When one reads all of Mrs. Eddy's statements about alcohol and tobacco use, it is clear that she taught that totally abstaining from both alcohol and tobacco is the only acceptable practice for a Christian Scientist...
"If someone identifying as a Christian Scientist believes it is ok to use alcohol or tobacco to any degree, he or she is clearly rejecting some of Mrs. Eddy's teachings." - MikeDavis (excerpted)
As I often say, there are clear differences between the teachings of Christian Science and the practice of Christian Science. Both are problematic, but counterfeiting a counterfeit does not mean you're practicing the real thing.
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:19 AM
|
|
|
|
Thanks for sharing that response. It certainly is consistent with what I was taught. It sounds like some Christian Scientists are trying to make the religion sound, to the public, less strict, but that the core practices are still the same. As far as I can tell, anyway, since I have been out of it for so long.
I have been reading some of the posts about how the churches now are scantily attended, and that they are all older gray-haired people, and I thought, "But what about the people I knew at Principia?" Then it hit me -- they, and I, ARE the older gray-haired people!
Ann
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, November 03, 2009 11:17 AM
|
|
|
|
Dawn Comes:
The fact that all do not agree means, to me, that there is hope on different levels that there is a movement away from the strictest adherence. To me, this is good news for children being raised by CS parents. Perhaps 'radical reliance' is being tempered by common sense in CS homes today.
I think what you are witnessing is that Christian Science is experiencing the same cultural or generational phenomena in North America that many Christian denominations (CS isn't one by definition) are undergoing. Namely, that it is OK to take a "cafeteria" approach to beliefs and its documents from which they are drawn. Pick and choose as you wish, according to you likes and dislikes!!! Make God what you want him to be.
People who practice this, of course, are totally oblivious or unaffected by the hypocrisy, contradictions and intellectual dishonesty inherent in this approach. But that is our society and all if not most of our institutions (including religious ones!!) reinforce this approach.
This is, of course, very unfortunate when it comes to Christianity and the Bible.
It may, however, prove to be the death knell of Christian Science. If those left in CS (particularly "younger" ones) take a cafeteria approach regarding acceptance and practice of MBE's teachings, how long will in be before the phrase 'I'm a Christian Scientist, but I don't believe one has to be a member of a branch church or strictly adhere to abstinence from medicine, a cocktail etc., in order to be one" will become the norm amongst those still loosely attached. I don't think it will take long and perhaps we are there already. With this, will come the closing of the doors of TMC and the end of CS as an organized religion.
John
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, November 03, 2009 3:32 PM
|
|
|
|
I think you're right. It is almost as if Christian Scientists in the fifties and sixties, when I was growing up, were fastidious adherents and many today are simply into metaphysics or new age alternatives and have no problem individualizing their belief systems. Although I think there was always a range of types as far as commitment and real practice in the church of yesterday, people today in general are just less likely to pretend they understand or pretend they are receiving healings. I wonder if many today actually pray daily against MAM, or seek religious exemptions for innoculations? Refuse dental anesthesia or remove their children from health classes at school? I'll bet not so many.
There is a part of me that will always respect those who do at least attempt to adhere to what they say they believe. Otherwise, I wonder what is the point? But the implications for the practice of CS are simply too serious, especially for children.
I went over to the Christian Science forum and read a bit. It seems as if there is a wide range of understanding there. My mother would surely cringe at some of the opinions posted there, but find some to be strong and solid, including the response to Do Go's question. And there are so few active posters.
I recently made a point to drive by the nearest CS church on a Sunday morning at 11:30 am, in a university town near me. The service time of 11 am was posted on a sign out front, so I knew I was there at the correct time. There were no cars there at all.
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 11:14 AM
|
|
|
|
DawnComes writes,
people today in general are just less likely to pretend they understand ...have healings...
She writes regarding CS, of course, but this, er, demonstrates a degree of religious apostasy that afflicts the general religious world. Whereas previous generations debated and contended for highly specific articulation of creeds, today's prevailing attitude seems to be "whatever." This may be an issue more appropriate for a general-issues thread, but, much as I am encouraged by the decline and hopefully imminent fall of institutional CS, I am disheartened by a somewhat seimilar situation in the conservative Protestant denominations. Consider that a worthwhile book in CBD.com is, Know What You Believe.
Widespread Scripture ignorance distresses me greatly. My pastor often introduces the Scripture reading with remarks such as, "We're going to be studying from Ezekiel. If you open your Bible to the middle of the book, you'll find Psalms. Ezekiel is about four books after that..."
Know What You Believe can be found at...
http://www.christianway.org/forums/Post.aspx?SessionID=j1lzn03psricpkipraygcr55
|
|
|
|