Bots, Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), trusted
6,234
edits
Gestefeld U.N. - Christian Science: Difference between revisions
Apply agreed Lucifer edition formatting, author categories, and journal text allocation.
(Prepare Lucifer volume III electronic edition: original journal text, pagination, illustrations and contents) |
(Apply agreed Lucifer edition formatting, author categories, and journal text allocation.) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| original title = "Christian Science" | | original title = "Christian Science" | ||
| has text = yes | | has text = yes | ||
| publications = [[Lucifer/Vol3|''Lucifer'', vol. 3]], no. 14, October 1888, pp. 164-168 | | publications = [[Lucifer/Vol3|''Lucifer'', vol. 3]], no. 14, October 1888, pp. 164-168 | ||
| read links = [[Lucifer/Vol3/Text|Electronic journal edition in Teopedia]] | | read links = [[Lucifer/Vol3/Text|Electronic journal edition in Teopedia]] | ||
| Line 14: | Line 12: | ||
| origin = English: Ursula N. Gestefeld, ''"Christian Science"'' | | origin = English: Ursula N. Gestefeld, ''"Christian Science"'' | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Page aside margins}} | |||
{{Page aside|164 | {{Page aside in Lucifer|v=3|n=14|p=164}} | ||
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Lucifer</span>’s criticism of the statements of “Christian Science,” as contained in a published course of “Lessons,” begins with an objection to the name after a fair digest of the “Lessons” themselves. | <span style="font-variant:small-caps">Lucifer</span>’s criticism of the statements of “Christian Science,” as contained in a published course of “Lessons,” begins with an objection to the name after a fair digest of the “Lessons” themselves. | ||
| Line 33: | Line 30: | ||
This is what Jesus taught; is the underlying substance of the “Sermon on the Mount”; is the interior meaning of the four gospels. “Divine” or | This is what Jesus taught; is the underlying substance of the “Sermon on the Mount”; is the interior meaning of the four gospels. “Divine” or | ||
{{Page aside|165}} | {{Page aside in Lucifer|v=3|n=14|p=165}} | ||
“Christian Science” is what is therein expressed; and it is the essence of all sciences. Those who do not find it there will naturally demur to the statement; it does not follow that others have not. | “Christian Science” is what is therein expressed; and it is the essence of all sciences. Those who do not find it there will naturally demur to the statement; it does not follow that others have not. | ||
| Line 45: | Line 42: | ||
The question “Is it true that all our diseases are the result of wrong belief,” would more completely embody the teaching of Christian Science if “wrong” were omitted. Belief is considered the opposite of understanding; and the question can only be answered by each one for himself, from the latter standpoint. All outward evidence seems to disprove the statement. If one makes no attempt to study the science of mathematics himself, he is dependent upon some one who has done so, and in none of his affairs involving mathematical calculation, does he know why the result is as it is. A would-be student of the science, who rests upon the statements of his teacher, believing what he is told, will never be a mathematician, will never be able to gain the correct | The question “Is it true that all our diseases are the result of wrong belief,” would more completely embody the teaching of Christian Science if “wrong” were omitted. Belief is considered the opposite of understanding; and the question can only be answered by each one for himself, from the latter standpoint. All outward evidence seems to disprove the statement. If one makes no attempt to study the science of mathematics himself, he is dependent upon some one who has done so, and in none of his affairs involving mathematical calculation, does he know why the result is as it is. A would-be student of the science, who rests upon the statements of his teacher, believing what he is told, will never be a mathematician, will never be able to gain the correct | ||
{{Page aside|166}} | {{Page aside in Lucifer|v=3|n=14|p=166}} | ||
answer to his problem and know that it is correct. He accepts the statements as made for the time being only; working out for himself the why and wherefore of them. He must understand before he can be a mathematician. Having reached that point, perceiving the principle of the science, he knows that all mathematical problems are forms which express the principle. He knows that any error in the answer to the problem is the fault of the worker of it, and is not there as a legitimate part of the problem, and he knows too that only by strict adherence to and following of the principle can he detect and destroy the error. He does not declare – if he is wise – that because he discerns what a mistake is, he is beyond the possibility of making one. | answer to his problem and know that it is correct. He accepts the statements as made for the time being only; working out for himself the why and wherefore of them. He must understand before he can be a mathematician. Having reached that point, perceiving the principle of the science, he knows that all mathematical problems are forms which express the principle. He knows that any error in the answer to the problem is the fault of the worker of it, and is not there as a legitimate part of the problem, and he knows too that only by strict adherence to and following of the principle can he detect and destroy the error. He does not declare – if he is wise – that because he discerns what a mistake is, he is beyond the possibility of making one. | ||
| Line 57: | Line 54: | ||
To perceive the direct connection between a certain form of physical disease and the mental state manifest therein – as quoted by <span style="font-variant:small-caps">Lucifer</span> – seems to the author of the “Lessons” unlikely in the present stage of the development of the science; and something which all Christian Scientists should be slow to do. Statements which are more the result of enthusiasm than sound deductions from a given premise, are justly open to criticism and least able to withstand it. | To perceive the direct connection between a certain form of physical disease and the mental state manifest therein – as quoted by <span style="font-variant:small-caps">Lucifer</span> – seems to the author of the “Lessons” unlikely in the present stage of the development of the science; and something which all Christian Scientists should be slow to do. Statements which are more the result of enthusiasm than sound deductions from a given premise, are justly open to criticism and least able to withstand it. | ||
{{Page aside|167}} | {{Page aside in Lucifer|v=3|n=14|p=167}} | ||
The future of Christian Science does not and cannot depend upon its method of treatment of disease as practised by the few for the many, though the favourable results so gained are the “signs” which naturally draw those who receive them to a consideration of the method which has furnished them. The understanding of the science in their turn reveals its preventive value and exemplifies the old adage “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” | The future of Christian Science does not and cannot depend upon its method of treatment of disease as practised by the few for the many, though the favourable results so gained are the “signs” which naturally draw those who receive them to a consideration of the method which has furnished them. The understanding of the science in their turn reveals its preventive value and exemplifies the old adage “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” | ||
| Line 71: | Line 68: | ||
The article, “Let every man prove his own works,” in <span style="font-variant:small-caps">Lucifer</span> No. 3, closes with an excellent analysis of a Theosophist. A parallel statement would be, ''He who does not declare and maintain his divine right to think for himself; he who does not unceasingly strive to discern the truth for its own sake; he who does not as unceasingly desire that that truth shall be made manifest regardless of gain or loss to himself; he who does not help to that result by unselfish effort for others; he'' | The article, “Let every man prove his own works,” in <span style="font-variant:small-caps">Lucifer</span> No. 3, closes with an excellent analysis of a Theosophist. A parallel statement would be, ''He who does not declare and maintain his divine right to think for himself; he who does not unceasingly strive to discern the truth for its own sake; he who does not as unceasingly desire that that truth shall be made manifest regardless of gain or loss to himself; he who does not help to that result by unselfish effort for others; he'' | ||
{{Page aside|168}} | {{Page aside in Lucifer|v=3|n=14|p=168}} | ||
''who is not ever ready to rob evil of its power by speaking the word of truth; by helping others to see and speak in their turn; by comforting the sorrowing; by aiding the weak; by charity for all and malice toward none; he who does not rigorously refrain from mentally influencing another so as to cause action on his part through other than his own will, is no Christian Scientist.'' | ''who is not ever ready to rob evil of its power by speaking the word of truth; by helping others to see and speak in their turn; by comforting the sorrowing; by aiding the weak; by charity for all and malice toward none; he who does not rigorously refrain from mentally influencing another so as to cause action on his part through other than his own will, is no Christian Scientist.'' | ||