 Posted Tuesday, December 27, 2005 8:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Open the Doors of the Temple: The Survival of Christian Science in the Twenty-First Century is the title of a book published in 2004 that I've been reading. Its author is Nancy Niblack Baxter, who is a dedicated Christian Scientist and long-time member of The Mother Church. Baxter's book addresses the numerical decline of Christian Scientists and what she perceives to be the reasons for this. She also offers her prescription for the Christian Science movement to become revitalized and move into the twenty-first century with renewed effectiveness.
It seems to me that Open the Doors of the Temple can be seen as a book-length explication of what John on this forum has called "neo Chistian Science."
A couple of chapter titles from the book: "Christian Science and the Medical Revolution" and "Suffering Children."
Baxter's book discusses a number of issues that have been extensively discussed here on the Christian Way Forum.
tmcl
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, December 27, 2005 10:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted Thursday, January 26, 2006 9:55 PM
|
|
|
|
I checked out this link, and there was this interesting quote from the book:
The mission of Christian Science now, as in the time of its earlier demonstration, is not primarily one of physical healing . Now, as then, signs and wonders are wrought in the metaphysical healing of physical disease, but these signs are only to demonstrate its divine origin—to attest the reality of the higher mission of the Christ power to take away the sins of the world.
Yet there are so many statements in S&H about the centrality of healing. Bear in mind, all of CS originates from MBE's alleged healing from her fall on the ice.
I was also intrigued by this statement from the publisher's promotional copy:
...the problems Christian Science is presently facing are in large part due to attitudes of Christian Scientists themselves in the heartland
This is the same old blame-the-victim mentality which permeates CS and TMC. "It's not the hierarchy's fault," she's saying, "it's the 'Field's'! If the rank-and-file were more....Spiritual, then the religion would not be having all these problems!!"
Even if I were a loyal CS'ist, I think I'd pass on this book.
|
|
|
Posted Friday, January 27, 2006 8:34 AM
|
|
|
|
followingHim wrote:
"I was also intrigued by this statement from the publisher's promotional copy:
'...the problems Christian Science is presently facing are in large part due to attitudes of Christian Scientists themselves in the heartland'
"This is the same old blame-the-victim mentality which permeates CS and TMC. "It's not the hierarchy's fault," she's saying, "it's the 'Field's'! If the rank-and-file were more....Spiritual, then the religion would not be having all these problems!!"
"Even if I were a loyal CS'ist, I think I'd pass on this book."
followingHim,
Having read the entire book, I would say that the statement by the publisher you quote, as well as your statement that Baxter is saying that if only the rank-and-file were more spiritual, that CS would not be having its problems, is extremely over-simplified. In fact, I don't recall offhand Baxter saying in the book that the solution to the problems of CS is for people in the Field to become more spiritual. (If she does, it is certainly a small part of a much larger and more complex argument.)
Actually, I would not be unhappy if many Christian Scientists were to read this book. While I feel sure that not all Christian Scientists would agree with every point that Baxter makes, she does bring up things about Christian Science and the Christian Science Movement that certainly need to be addressed. Also, as I mentioned in my earlier post in this thread, in my opinion the book presents an explication of what John has called "neo Christian Science." And I see "neo Christian Science" (or at least aspects of it), as something that is definitely gaining ground among Christian Scientists today.
tmcl
tmcl
|
|
|
Posted Friday, January 27, 2006 10:28 AM
|
|
|
|
TMCL,
Thanks for the feedback. I'm always behind in my reading, spiritual and otherwise, so I would hardly be putting in the time (at my plodding rate--I'll never get a speed-reading ticket!) for this. As I said, I was remarking on the blurbs from the promotional webpage. So the blurbs are not an accurage representation of the book? Nothing new or shocking there.
I still hold that when CS fails, "blame-the-patient" is a frequent response, so the excerpted remarks were consistent with my expectations.
Perhaps you should write a review. You could submit it to Amazon, or some of the non-TMC organizations and websites.
Last thought: Your use of a double negative ("I would not be unhappy if many CS'ists wre to read this book...") suggests "damning with feint praise." That's the "grammar cop" in me coming out. A wisecrack I sometimes employ is, "What do you get when you have an English major in law enforcement?-- Three-page reports!" Practically ALL my arestees plead out on their first court appearance!
|
|
|
Posted Friday, January 27, 2006 12:03 PM
|
|
|
|
followingHim,
Baxter actually has a whole chapter devoted to the "blame" issue, entitled: "'It's Your Fault!' No, It's Yours!'".
tmcl
tmcl
|
|
|
Posted Friday, January 27, 2006 12:13 PM
|
|
|
|
followingHim,
The "blame the patient" issue is also discussed in Baxter's chapter entitled "The Chariot of Fire Cools Down."
tmcl
tmcl
|
|
|
|