Monday, March 30, 2009

This says it all...

From a Forum post on TMC Youth:

"I'm new to CS, so I have some thoughts on this topic.

I didn't know anything about CS & had heard that it was a cult, etc. I was reading a book by a New Age author who was raised CS & the things she described resonated with what I believe. So, I decided to look into it further. It has been 1 year & I feel frustrated at how hard it is to learn. S&H is difficult to read and church doesn't help me understand anything more nor does the bible lesson. Yet, with all of this difficulty, I continue to try b/c of what people talk about CS being for them. Plus, it's one of the few Christian religions where the people seem genuinely happy - that says a lot!

1. What I would like is to be able to go to Sunday School and learn the basics there. It seems like everything that I want to learn people say they learned in SS. But, I'm waaaaay over the age limit.

2. It would be nice to have some kind of introductory/study guide to help. For example, I am lost when it comes to Prayer and how to pray and what to say, etc. I know there isn't a set formula, but there are steps people go through. Maybe first looking in the bible for a great quote or something... How long do you pray? If nothing is happening, do you find another quote? What do you say? And the list goes on...

3. A lot of people seem to have been raised as CS & don't realize how difficult it is to understand much less utilize the information in S&H. I'm sure many people found healing just reading it, but for me, I haven't found healing nor understanding. And there isn't a resource available to aid me. I've read The Sentinel, MBE Biographies, etc.

So, there are my difficulties at 1 year in. Take it for what it's worth - 1 person's opinion."

http://www.tmcyouth.com/forums/showthread.php?p=18126#post18126 

Saturday, March 21, 2009

be careful what you ask for

Well it's been a few days since I sent out my survey. I've heard from so many people it's been great. It was a little overwhelming to hear the disappointment of people who grew up in this church, whether they still attend or wouldn't set foot in a CS church ever again. Some responses were really vile, particularly the ones from people who converted to mainstream Christianity. The interesting thing is that they were the only people who were unhappy with the actual teachings of Christian Science. The rest of the responders were upset about one cultural thing or another. The dangerous avoidence of Doctors was huge, the judgemental nature of our members, the worship of MBE or teachers/practitioners, boring church services, etc...

So my conclusion so far is it's not resistance to the Christ, or not enough healing, or MBE's discovery, it's the closed minded, limited, judgemental, fearful CS culture that's draining our church membership. We could bring people back in if we start over from scratch - read S&H, understand it's teachings, know the Manual, and create the most loving, embracing, helpful church community we can.

I know there's more to be said here...
see you soon, I'm going to read my S&H

Monday, March 16, 2009

Please send my survey to people you know....

I published a survey, It's no longer available

Amazing input from a newcomer to a CS service

Monday, March 16, 2009

Church #11: Christian Scientists

In 2000, I became a Christian at the age of 23. Two years later, I was working at one of the largest churches in the country. After two more years, I left that job to help start a brand new church. Four years later, I stopped attending church. So...no church, to attending church, to working in a church, to starting a church, to leaving the church - all in less than eight years. Now, I am visiting 52 churches in 52 weeks in order to redefine my faith. This is reflection 11 of 52.


Much like last week (the Jehovah's Witnesses), I knew very little about Christian Scientists. They certainly have no connection to the Church of Scientology, and they are definitely a branch of Christianity (believe in Jesus, use the Christian Bible, etcetera).

From what I could tell, the Christian Scientists have nothing to do with science. I couldn't find a Periodic Table of Elements anywhere. Contrary to what my friend, Jason, suggested, communion was not taken from a beaker. Nary a Bunsen burner was involved in the whole operation.

This was a journey of confusion - one that left me with more questions than answers.

But first, some details: The main room was actually pretty nice - very Catholic looking. Traditional pews sat about 400 people, and there were exactly 24 people in attendance. That's right...24 people.

Let's stop here and chat.

Twenty-four people? I believe small churches can be wonderful and spiritual and meaningful, but shouldn't it be a sign when you open your doors to the masses and twenty-four people show up? And, to be honest, I am being gracious with that number. Three of the twenty-four were up front speaking. And I was there. One guy was the greeter. And at least three people stood up to pass the collection bag around. So, sixteen is a more accurate number.

And it's not like this is a brand new church plant. They have been around for years - at least the past fourteen years that I have been hanging around Clifton. That's about one new person per year. Not good.

The service itself could not have been more boring. They could have tried, but they would have failed. And no one spoke to me - not once. Now, I may have had a, "If you speak to me, I will bite off your ear" facial expression, but still, a friendly hello would have been appreciated.

It began with a hymn, then a scripture reading, then a silent prayer, then the Lord's Prayer...but let's stop again to chat.

Here is the key to the Christian Scientists:

They use the Christian Bible. From what I could tell, it was the King James version. But they have a second book called Science & Health with Key to the Scriptures. This book was written by their founder, Mary Baker Eddy, in 1875ish. Eddy founded the religion when she was healed around that time and realized the Christian faith should be more focused on healings.

Christian Scientists don't really use doctors or medicine. In their booklet, they said people were permitted to use doctors if they made that personal choice, but one Frequently Asked Question was, "What would you do if you broke your leg?" Their answer: "Some may have a doctor set the bone, but many others have seen bones set and mended by prayer alone."

False. That is stupid. So, so dumb. No one has ever seen that. Especially not a Christian Scientist. I wanted to break someone's leg on the spot and ask them to start praying. If I sound a little irritable, it's because I am. People who refuse to see a doctor to treat a broken leg because they prefer to pray about it should be shot. Then they can pray about being healed from the bullet wound and we can see how that works out for them.

Deep breath. Moving on...

Back to the Lord's Prayer. So, in her book, Eddy gives (direct quote), "What I understand to be the spiritual sense of the Lord's Prayer." So the pastor would read a verse of the prayer, and then read the corresponding line from Eddy's interpretation.

"Our Father which art in heaven" = "Our Father-Mother God, all-harmonious." And so on.

The "Mother" addition was interesting. As was the fact that all three people leading the service were women. But, the Christian Scientists don't really put much value in pastors or leaders. In fact, a quote from their "explanatory note" informs the congregation that, "The Bible and the Christian Science textbook are our only preachers." And they were.

The sermon consisted of one woman standing to read a handful of Bible verses, then another woman standing to read the corresponding passages from Eddy's book. They used about sixty verses of scripture and thirty textbook readings. And that was the entire message.

Riveting.

For example, they read Acts 3:1-10, which is one of my favorite stories from the Bible. And then Eddy's passage was gibberish. Something about God's mind and people being spiritual, and nothing is material, and blah blah blah. They believe the Science & Health book is divinely inspired, but man, it was boring and hard to follow.

They also mentioned something about Adam (from Adam & Eve fame) actually dreaming when he imagined the Garden of Eden. Or maybe we dreamt up his story. I am almost positive they regard most of the Old Testament stories as myth, so it might have had something to do with that.

Overall, the Christian Science faith just felt so dead to me. There was no joy, no humor, no smiles, no life, no anything. Most of the congregation was old - half were over sixty-years-old. I just can't imagine people being drawn to a faith that makes you feel like you're sitting through a funeral.

Visiting the Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Scientists in consecutive weeks was a mistake. These past two weeks made me grumpy - seeing my faith twisted into some freak show has that effect on me, I suppose.

These past two weeks haven't been good for my soul. Visiting churches outside of mainstream Christianity has been interesting, and I have learned a lot about other religions and about myself, but I am not finding God in those places. And a big part of this journey is reconnecting with God in a meaningful way. I'll continue visiting a variety of churches, but I need a few weeks off from the insanity.

http://churchexperiment.blogspot.com/

Sunday, March 15, 2009

It doesn't take much to start a new church

I think the biggest problem people who want change are coming up against is speaking rationally to emotional people. They don't have an argument to lean on for keeping things the same, but it won't stop them from clinging to the traditions. Why bother trying to convince them. We should be starting our own churches like they did in Mrs. Eddy's day. All you need to start a church is to be "A member of this Church who obeys its By-Laws and is a loyal exemplary Christian Scientist working in the Field,"  Man 72:4-12  Organizing Churches. SECT. 6. 

 We could all go out today and find 4 members of the Mother Church, 12 other people including 1 practitioner and be branch churches with any kind of service we want. Why are we wasting our time on the old churches. Do we want to have to train people to be loving and non-judgmental? Do we want to have to go to committee every time we want to make minor changes? 

 I come across so many people that say they want change and they mean announcing the name of the solo before it's sung, or getting rid of the usher that stands in front of the church doing nothing. In that sense most people would say they want change, someone probably hates the color of the carpet, or thinks the organ needs to be completely overhauled. This isn't the kind of change that's going to bring one person into a church and keep them there. We must go out today and speak with the 98% of the people who left the church and find out why they left and listen and pray about how to make church relevant to them. 

 I don't want to make people into proper Christian Scientists, I want Christian Science to be perfect for people. And it is, there must be a way to help people see it. I will do whatever I can to make it relevant for them and make a home for them.

 

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

How radical are we willing to go?

I just read the history of the Appendix and the Present order of Services from the MBE Library. They make a statement, "We have located no documentation that would suggest that Mrs. Eddy viewed the Appendix as less significant than the preceding pages of the Manual", But that means there was also no documentation to suggest that Mrs. Eddy thought of the appendix as anything other than, by definition, a "less essential addition". They also said, "We have found no statements by Mrs. Eddy that shed light on how the word “present” should be interpreted in “Present Order of Services.”” What would be the reason to interpret the word present? We really have to take it at its face value- meaning in process; not from the past or in the future

Mrs. Eddy changed her mind about the church consistently over the years. Apparently she was making changes to the Manual right up to the day of her passing. I doubt that if she’d lived another 100 years she would have stopped making changes. I like to think that’s why she left the Manual so open and unrestrictive for us. We get into trouble when we try to second guess what Mrs. Eddy wanted us to do 100 years after she lost the ability to make all our decisions for us. 

The church in Mrs. Eddy’s day was organic and changing constantly. It’s unlikely that she would have let the church stay stagnant the way it has for 100 years. I don't know if Mrs. Eddy wanted us to look at undated, inaccurate and out of context quotes in Misc. Writings to figure out what to do today. I think we need to look at Mrs. Eddy's essence and intentions, and like in the 1st tenant, take her inspired word as our sufficient guide to running our churches.

Are we willing to loosen our hold on the "present* order of services"to see change in the Church Service? If we want something radically different do we need to hold a completely different kind of service on Saturday? The Manual by-laws only require that any/all Sunday Services include 2 Readers reading the weekly Bible lesson. Do we wrap a different service around the Bible Lesson? Would that make a difference?

In talking to people who don't go to church but want to, I find they're looking for more human interaction -small group discussion, Q&A, lectures, as part of the church service. They say they want to go to church at a normal church time so offering these things during the week doesn't solve the "service" issue. Do we need to call ourselves "groups" rather than churches to give them what they want?

*Present: Now existing, or in process; begun but not ended; now in view, or under consideration; being at this time; not past or future. -Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Stop making up by-laws - a rant

I was at two meetings this week discussing options we might consider in changing the church services. On both occasions people referenced Mrs. Eddy preferences for elements of the service by pointing out quotes in Misc. Writings. I can't help feeling that the only research anyone needs to do to know what Mrs. Eddy wanted for church is to pick up the Manual. That's the only official set of rules for church. If you’re holding on to some element of church that isn’t explicit in the Manual by insisting that Mrs. Eddy meant for us to do it, you’re really saying she just forgot to add  it to one of the 88 versions she published in her lifetime. Even though she makes it clear that she prayed long and hard about every by-law, the one thing that you don’t want to change was the one thing God didn’t remind her to put in. It’s offensive to me to treat her with such disrespect. The Manual is the only set of rules for the Church, and we are doing this movement a huge disservice in making up “by-laws” that don’t exist.