A Book Review on Christian Science Our Glorious Heritage – Where has it gone?
A friend of mine ordered a copy of Christian Science Our Glorious Heritage – Where has it gone? My friend ordered it directly from Amazon, there was no packaging slip; so, I do not know what the price of the book is. It is written by Christeen Anderson, made in the USA, San Bernardino, California. The date is given as January 20, 2016. A good portion of the book has Xerox copies of letters, newspaper clippings and other printed material to substantiate her quotes.
The book consists of six different sections. In some of the book I got confused, when I was not sure if Christeen Anderson was writing something or if it was a quote. I probably should have read the section with the Photostats before reading her book, as this may have solved my confusion. What the author has done is very important work for the Cause.
Although I found her explanations on The First Church of Christ Scientist’s original Edifice interesting, it falls way short of what I have done in my own writings. She only mentioned ten of the windows and left out most of the main auditorium (lower level and upper level) windows along with the South Gallery windows. I found her section on the Extension far more interesting. Some of the things she wrote about symbols are left up to interpretation. I am not saying that she is right or wrong about them; I just think there can be other reasons for the symbols other than what she mentioned. To me she left out one of the most important symbols in the Edifice – WINDOW OF THE OPEN BOOK. Even though she did speak about THE WOMAN GOD-CROWNED window she did not explain its importance.
A good portion of the book is about the “Trade Edition” of Science and Health (the Textbook of 1994), with the changes made in it. [My interpolations will be in brackets when I quote from her book.]
On page 4 of “The Writings of Mary Baker Eddy Changes in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures” she writes: “The changes found were determined by comparing the last Science and Health published in the fall of 1910, which is the final edition Mrs. Eddy approved, and the revised 1994 ‘Trade Edition’ of Science and Health [even though some of these changes she mentions took place way before the Trade Edition was published], put out by the Christian Science Publishing Society [which is run by the five board of directors, even though it is not supposed to be run by the board of directors]. This is not a complete list, but it will give you an idea of the manipulations of the original text that has transpired.
“1. Mary Baker Eddy’s portrait and signature were removed from the page facing the title page in the 1911 edition. [Did she mean 1910 edition? My point: Mary Baker Eddy’s portrait and signature are Mary Baker Eddy’s own Trademark. It was illegal to remove Mary Baker Eddy’s Trademark and replace it with the Christian Science Seal trademark. A trademark is used as a type of copyright; Mary Baker Eddy’s book was copyrighted forever (it is her own trademark/copyright) and it is illegal to change one word of her book. Why did they remove her Trademark? Well, they wanted control of the Textbook. And they did this under the pretense that to have her picture in her books was a form of deification of her personal. They also lied and said Mary Baker Eddy did not want her picture in her books. These are tricks of the red dragon. Below is her Trademark as it was in the 1910 Textbook.]
“2. There are 157 marginal heading changes. These changes often give a different emphasis to the paragraph or paragraphs into which they are imbedded. [Yet she does not give any examples of this. I went through two chapters and did not find any changes except for hyphens or placement of words. Is this what she is speaking of?]”
Number 3 was on changes in the upper and lower case of letters [again she does not give any examples or tell us where we can find these changes] and number 4 was on the chapter “Fruitage.” “Fruitage” is the last chapter which originally consisted of eighty-four testimonies. I feel that the number eighty-four is symbolic of seven times twelve, where we have seven years (each year with twelve months) following the Word order of the seven synonyms of God (Mind, Spirit, Soul, Principle, Life, Truth, and Love). What she brings out, about the last testimony, is of importance. “‘A Grateful Testimony,’ coming at the end of the last edition of Science and Health in 1910, is the final link, linking us with the living Word. The testifier has seen that to live the Word is far greater than either the spoken or the written word. Mrs. Eddy ended her book with the phrase, ‘and, the most beautiful of all, from darkness to light.’ The theme of, ‘darkness to light,’ runs through the entire book from the first paragraph in Preface through page 700. The marginal heading for Mrs. Eddy’s own testimony, on page 108 of Science and Health, is entitled, ‘Light shining in darkness.’ Have we all only, ‘…progressed a little way in the knowledge of God, good, as revealed in Christian Science,’ as the last testifier in the chapter ‘Fruitage’ states in the only Science and Health available to the world since 1912? The definition of ‘knowledge,’ in the ‘Glossary,’ will give the reader a clear understanding of the reason Mrs. Eddy did not end the book with this testimony. Page 700, at the end of the chapter ‘Fruitage,’ was full in the last 1910 edition of Science and Health as Mrs. Eddy specified in 1907. The page is now found to be half full. Does not God take us all the way, and not just, ‘a little way in the knowledge of God, good’?” (p. 5)
“Christian Science is absolute; it is neither behind the point of perfection nor advancing towards it; it is at this point and must be practised therefrom.’ (The First Church of Christ, Scientist and Miscellany, page 242; Anderson’s quote)
Section 6 of the “Trade Edition” is about the “Word Index” found at the back of the book after “Fruitage.” Why was this placed in the book (adding to God’s Word)? Boston’s reason was to help the new readers to easily look up words within the Textbook. The “Trade Edition” was printed up for “seekers” of Christian Science; this is explained completely in the back of Anderson’s book in the section Science Obscured. Virginia Harris, a board member in the 1990s and 2000s was all gung-ho for selling the Textbook to the world, yet her motives were totally the opposite of Christian Science. One could make the point that the “Trade Edition” was important for sale purposes by the money makers (mortals out to make money on Mary Baker Eddy’s books) within God’s Temple (for these mortals are members of the material organization)! Anderson explains that there was once a time when Mary Baker Eddy did have an index, but she removed it in 1902 when she replaced it with her chapter “Fruitage.” It was in 1903 that a complete Concordance was compiled, so there was no further need to have an index in the Textbook. Personally, I have never found the Index at the end of the Textbook (Trade Edition) to be of much use. Also, it does not have “woman God-crowned” listed in it!
Anderson states that there are four sections to the “Trade Edition” unlike Mary Baker Eddy’s three sections (1 – Science and Health with “Preface” and chapters 1-14; 2 – Key to the Scriptures with chapters 15-17; and 3 – “Fruitage”), the 3-in-1 pattern. She says, “These three writings unite to construct the Christian Science textbook. Each of these sections represents one aspect of the triune Principle: Life, Truth, and Love. [I combined two of her sections together (below) as one.]
- “‘Science and Health’ is Life because it teaches humanity the system and rules of life. [Science and Health] represents revelation because this was Mrs. Eddy’s revelation [Science] as presented to her by God.
- “‘Key to the Scriptures’ is Truth because it represents the truth found in the Scriptures. [Key to the Scriptures] represents reason because it explains the logic of the Scriptures [true Theology].
- “‘Fruitage’ is Love because it shows the evidence of God’s love for humanity in their daily lives. [‘Fruitage’] represents demonstration because it is the [Medicinal] visible proof of the Word.” (pages 6 & 7)
“Intelligence is omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence. It is the primal and eternal quality of infinite Mind, of the triune Principle, — Life, Truth, and Love, — named God.” (S&H 469; Anderson’s quote)
“I knew the Principle of all harmonious Mind-action to be God, and that cures were produced in primitive Christian Healing by holy, uplifting faith; but I must know the Science of this healing, and I won my way to absolute conclusions through divine revelation, reason, and demonstration.” (S&H 109; Anderson’s quote)
Anderson’s seventh point is about the note that Mary Baker Eddy placed at the end of “Preface” which had been there since the second edition (since 1878).
“Note – None need apply to the author for consultations on disease, or to take patients. She is not at present laboring in this department.”
She explains that this statement or one similar to it appeared in every Science and Health through 1914; then in 1915 it was removed. What was the reason?
Anderson writes, on page 8, “Is Mrs. Eddy saying to us in the ‘Note,’ ‘Don’t look to me, as a person, for the answers. Your answers will be found in the following text of the book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures[.]’?
“In leaving the ‘Note’ at the end of ‘Preface’ from 1878 to 1910, she emphasized the fact that each student is to look to the Principle of the Science of Christianity and not to a person [or a board of directors]. This was to inform each student, as he begins to read the first chapter entitled ‘Prayer,’ that he is embarking on his own individual spiritual journey.”
After this she goes into a list of changes made in the illegal 89th edition of the Church Manual (not authorized by Mary Baker Eddy. Even though Boston claims that Mary Baker Eddy did approve these changes they have never shown any proof of her approval).
In her list of Manual changes, Christeen lists 54 changes, what was changed, and what year the changes were made.
Her next section is on the symbols of The First Church (the Mother Church) and the Extension. The very same exact year that the “Trade Edition” was released for sale (1994) is the same year that the window in the North Gallery of the Edifice, with the plain open circle, was changed by having the Church Manual (for The First Church) placed inside the circle. A Church Center Bulletin of June 2, 1994, stated:
“It is with a great deal of joy and gratitude that we tell you about the installation of a new window in the Original Mother church. It depicts the Manual of the Mother Church and fills what used to be an empty circle in a window in the North Gallery. It is located right next to the window with the Bible and Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. The new window will be put in place before Annual Meeting.
“The Manual of the Mother Church was not published until September 1895, more than six months after the completion of the Original Edifice, and so was not available as a theme for the window. William Lyman Johnson, son of one of the first members of the board of Directors, recorded that two of the board members at the time [At what time? Certainly not at the time of the building of the church because at that time there was no Manual.] told him that if they had the Manual in 1894, they would have depicted it in that window [not if Mary Baker Eddy would not have approved of it being placed there. The authors’ point (of this bulletin), or their excuse, is moot since there was no Church Manual in 1994.].
“It is in keeping with that remark (and the number of other changes made to the windows through the years [I would like to know what these changes are]) that we have accepted an anonymous donor’s gift of this window commemorating the building of the Original Mother Church 100 years ago.”
Anderson comments, “What arrogance the two members of the 1894 Christian Science Board of Directors display here. It was not their place to put anything in the windows or take anything out.” This includes the five directors of 1994! It is this type of thinking that points out why Mary Baker Eddy had to write the Church Manual in the first place! “That the present Board would use that as authority for changing the window is beyond reason. The Board of Directors in the past have not had, nor does the current Board have, the spiritual insight possessed by Mary Baker Eddy. If any Board of Directors truly had had the spiritual insight of Mrs. Eddy, there would have been little need for her. This attitude is being shown today by the fact that the beautiful symbols she left are being systematically removed. Referring back to the statement made in 1994, one would wonder what other changes have been made to the windows in both the original edifice and the Extension.” (p. 16)
Shown below is a drawing taken from an official blue print that was provided by the city of Boston. It is found on page 22 of Anderson’s book. I have added symbolism to the colored diagram.
I realized the importance of the pyramid shape back in the 1990s, it was around 1998 or 99 when the Major Pyramid Matrix of Truth came to me. However, I applied it strictly to the little original Edifice. What I found interesting about the shape of the Edifice is that it resembles the Superman logo shape (on Krypton the ‘S’ stands for hope). What is of most importance is that it is Mother’s Room that is the capstone (headstone) of the Church. What is also of importance is the fact that the Director’s Room is below Mother’s Room, so this means that Mother’s consciousness (room) is on a higher spiritual level than the board of directors is! And they will stay that way until they obey the estoppel clauses in the Church Manual.
I do find some of Anderson’s symbolic explanations quite interesting; however, there are other explanations for them. One example is found on page 24:
“The church is unusually well lighted, and one of the extraordinary features is the eight bronze chains, each suspending seventy-two lamps, each lamp of thirty-two candle-power.” (The First Church of Christ, Scientist and Miscellany, page 69)
“Eight is the symbol for the infinite or Deity. The 8th plank in the ‘Platform,’ found in Science and Health, page 332, reads thus:
“‘Father-Mother (marginal heading)
“VIII. Father-Mother is the name of Deity, which indicates His tender relationship to His spiritual creation. As the apostle expressed it in words which he quoted with approbation from a classic poet: “For we are also His offspring.”’
“Why would she have 72 hanging lamps? In the Bible, Jesus sent out 70 to spread his Word. Mrs. Eddy sent out 72 to be a light unto the world…”
Even though I do like her explanation (which continues), I do feel that there could be another reason for the 72 lamps. Remember that there are twelve stars on the woman’s crown (Revelation 12), and 6 (symbolic of Truth) times 12 equals 72. Joshua fought the battle of Jericho when the Israelite nation (the 12 tribes) circled the city for six days? It was not until the seventh day (of Love) when the walls come a tumbling down.
She goes on to ask why there would be 32 candles in each lamp. She equates the number to the 32 planks of the “Platform” in the chapter “Science of Being.” This Platform “is our explanation of what the Christ represents. Let the Christ, Truth, always light our way and go before us as we journey onward. Thus, we have the 70 sent by Jesus, plus you, as an individual, and the Christ. [Yet, are not you one with Christ – thus one and not two?] The Christ always goes before, lighting the way. We now have the 72 lamps bringing light into the world so that all may see and exclaim.” I ask, why are not we (what she calls “you”) part of the 70 and Jesus and Mary Baker Eddy the 2; as in the two witnesses? Should Mary Baker Eddy be left out of this equation?
Although Christeen Anderson does mention Christ and Christmas she never really goes into much detail about the book. This is okay as there are many others who have done extensive work on the poem.
Her next section is called “The Design of God.” It is very short, and covers only a couple of pages. After this is “The History of Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures.” Again, it is only a couple of pages with facsimiles from particular Textbooks. I did find her excerpt from an address by Eloise Knapp (Bliss Knapp’s wife) of 1924 of interest.
“In 1902, Mrs. Eddy replaced the text in the Index in Science and Health by the chapter entitled ‘Fruitage’. This chapter contains one hundred pages of testimonies by those who have been healed of all manner of diseases by the perusal or study of the Christian Science textbook. Soon after ‘Fruitage’ appeared, an earnest student of Christian Science (Bliss Knapp) wrote to Mrs. Eddy, telling her that this chapter, comprising pages 600 to 700 in the textbook, seemed to him to typify the opening of THE SEVENTH SEAL prophesied in the Apocalypse, for they proved that ‘The Little Book’ was freeing mankind from sickness and sin. Mrs. Eddy answered him most lovingly, commending him for the spirituality of his thought. What an inspiration to know that we have in our possession the book which is breaking the seventh and last seal of error.”
Further on (pages 28-32) there is an article by Bliss Knapp’s father Ira O. Knapp. He too mentions the seven seals (p. 31 and 32).
“This book of Revelation was sealed with seven seals; and no man was found worthy to unloose the seven seals, but the ‘Lion of the tribe of Juda,’ the ‘Root of David.’ [His statement is interesting, because I always thought the book that was sealed with the seven seals was the Bible itself. I am tempted to believe that Mr. Knapp is correct, because at the time of the writing of Revelation there was no Bible.] This root of David — this spiritual idea — is seen as ‘a Lamb as it had been slain;’ that is, slain to human sense, all along the ages [not just during the life time of Jesus Christ]. This lamb with seven horns [complete spiritual power?] and seven eyes [complete spiritual vision?] typically represents ‘the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.’ The divine order is exemplified in this revelation or opening of the seals, from the first [Mind] to the last [Love]. In the opening of the seventh seal [Love], there were seven angels which stood before God, and they were given seven trumpets which were to be sounded in their order. ‘But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.’ [Yet the seventh angel does not sound his or her trumpet until the second woe is past. The seventh angel sounds its trumpet in Revelation 11:15.]
“The ‘little book’ which was open in the hand of the angel spoken of in Revelation 10, was given to St. John to eat; and this is typically described in a few unmistakable words to those who follow in the footsteps of this revelation. Here then we have a ‘little book’ within [Revelation] this book of seven seals. But who should be found worthy to give this ‘little book’ to a waiting world? A long night of materialism has darkened this world since this typical and prophetic revelation was given to St. John. Yet, in the divine order of fulfillment on earth, this ‘little book’ would be opened to the world and known only as we ‘eat it,’ — understanding it spiritually. [Or as I put it, we mentally digest it.] We cannot successfully deny that this ‘little book’ is found in the revelation and demonstration of Christian Science, and is therefore a sign of the times to mark the divine order of revelation, — indicating that ignorance of God’s way of salvation is no longer an excuse for believing in the reality of sin, sickness, and death.” (The article goes on. [My interpolations.])
It is a fact that the hands on the grandfather clock in Christ and Christmas’ 7th Illustration SUFFER THE CHILDREN points us to Revelation 5:1-5. Is the girl a symbol of the Lamb during the Seventh Day of Love? This is the only Illustration in Christ and Christmas where the Textbook is actually an open book (unsealed).
This same illustration is depicted in Mother’s Room (even though the girl looks different). Is it possible that the girl is also the angel (divine messenger) spoken of in Revelation 10?
I now realize the importance to the fact that the open Bible, found above the western window of MARY FIRST AT THE RESURRECTION, is open to the book of St. John, the disciple responsible for Revelation.
A very good point made by Christeen Anderson is a warning found in Revelation against changing Science and Health, the little book open.
“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book [Revelation], If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy [which is Science and Health Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy – spoken about in Revelation 10], God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Rev. 22:18-19; My interpolations are not adding to the book of Revelation, but rather an explanation of what Christeen Anderson was trying to get across in her book on page 34.)
Going back now, on pages 10 and 11 she speaks on the topics of The Triune Principle, Solitary Research, and Three Measures of Meal. She ties these three topics in with the previous section on the three parts of the Textbook. The three measures of meal have to do with the chapter “Science, Theology, Medicine”.
Her next section is about “Fruitage” and the changes made to the chapter after 1910. The biggest point is that the chapter no longer ends with in light. “Thus I have progressed a little way in the knowledge of God, good, as revealed in Christian Science.” (S&H 700)
Anderson tells us that this “is not consistent with the logic of divine Science. The Bible promises ‘Now are we the sons of God.’ There is no progression to perfection.
“Now, consider the definition of ‘knowledge’ on page 590 in the Glossary. ‘KNOWLEDGE. Evidence obtained from the five corporeal senses; mortality; beliefs and opinions; human theories, doctrines, hypotheses; that which is not divine and is the origin of sin, sickness, and death; the opposite of spiritual Truth and understanding.’
“By ending the Christian Science textbook with the above statement, man has been placed back into the darkness of materiality. As stated in the ‘scientific statement of being’ on page 468, it clearly emphasizes, ‘Therefore man is not material; he is spiritual.’
It is a fact that Mary Baker Eddy’s definition of “knowledge” has to do with the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This definition, of course, is defining all that goes with material science, the opposite of the Knowledge (Science) of God which is given to us when we eat the “Fruitage” from the tree of life (Life-Science that is), with its leaves (pages) of salvation for the twelve nations.
On pages 24 and 25 she reports on the Textbook that was printed in 1912. There is a news report on it from the April 18, 1912 edition of the New York Sun. It seems that certain portions of the book were repeated and other sections were left out. It leaves one to wonder what was going on! Augusta E. Stetson described the book as being “in a most confused, distorted condition. The last five pages of the chapter on ‘Marriage’ are left out, the first eleven pages of the chapter entitled ‘Christian Science Versus Spiritualism’ are omitted. Besides this the chapter on ‘Animal Magnetism Unmasked’ is twice repeated in the book also of this chapter on ‘Science, Theology, and Medicine’ there are five pages twice inserted.
“Altogether there is a marked evidence of great lack of spiritual alertness and eternal vigilance in guarding this book from the ‘enemy of good’ who would part the ‘seamless garment and cast lots for its vesture.’ More spirituality is needed to protect this work.”
Ouch! I am sure that this hit Boston with a severe blow, as it came from their enemy whom they had excommunicated in 1909.
Over on page 27 is a Xerox copy of The Christian Science Journal, of February 1955, on the topic of changes made to Mary Baker Eddy’s writings. They mention the word “misinformation” in the first paragraph. The second paragraph is a lie. “Since her passing in 1910 no change whatever has been made in anything which she has written. The text of all her writings as published remains today exactly as she left it, and will, of course, be preserved permanently in this form.” Yet they go on to mention two changes in “Fruitage” that were made! I suppose in their line of thought it was okay to change the letters in “Fruitage” because Mary Baker Eddy did not write them. Yet, she chose them for this chapter and they should have remained! Let us not forget that they did change the Church Manual right off the bat. Remember the “Note” from “Preface” being stricken from the record, but, what about their biggest crime of all? The biggest crime being the removal of Mary Baker Eddy’s picture and autograph from the front of the book!
They say, “Mrs. Eddy took great care to protect the copyrights on her books. For similar reasons, the Trustees under the Will of Mary Baker Eddy, her publishers, have adopted what are known as trademarks for her books and have registered them in many countries. The trademarks are the cross and crown emblem and Mrs. Eddy’s signature in facsimile [reproduction of]. This action was taken because copyrights are limited as to duration, and differently limited in different countries, whereas the protection of a trademark, if renewed as required, is permanent in virtually all countries. The trademarks will always identify and protect books regularly authorized and published under the arrangements made by Mrs. Eddy.” Parts of this are true and the last sentence is misleading. Let me tell you why. Mary Baker Eddy’s picture and her signature in facsimile is HER TRADEMARK!!! So, the truth is that Boston removed her picture and signature because they KNEW that this one page, that came before any written text, was her trademark! They also removed her picture (her Trademark) from Miscellaneous Writings.
Anderson’s third section (page numbers start over again) is The Mother Church Manual Yesterday * Today * Forever. Christeen Anderson goes into great detail about the changes made from 1910 (the 88th edition) to 1975 (the 89th edition was promoted directly after December 3, 1910). She asked her reader why, in three different writings of Mary Baker Eddy, was the date changed to April 12, 1879 from April 19, 1879? The reason given by Boston is that there was no meeting “of the Christian Scientist Association” held on April 19, 1879, that the meeting was held on the 12th. I ask, is it possible that Mary Baker Eddy got it wrong in three different places, or did Mary Baker Eddy change the date on purpose in order (not to lie) but to be symbolic about it? For in “The Apocalypse” she wrote – “Spiritual teaching must always be by symbols.”
Christeen seems to think her date was a symbol because “April 19, 1775 was immortalized by Ralph Waldo Emerson in his ‘Concord Hymn’.
“‘By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled,
Here once the embattled farmers stood.
And fired the shot heard round the world.’
“By recording the date April 19, 1879, was Mrs. Eddy hinting that the motion voted on that day would affect the whole world?” (p. 18)
The “shot heard round the world” had to do with the Revolutionary War. This war for Independence from a mother country took place in order that Christian Science (the Lamb’s Bride) could be born in less than 100 years.
Another important issue mentioned about the Manual, is over a statute quoted in its 1892 form in the footnote on page 130 of the Manual has undergone a series of changes by the Massachusetts legislature. “Editor’s note: In May 1971, this statute (renumbered section one of Chapter 68) was amended by substituting ‘residents’ for ‘citizens.’” The Journal article explains the reason for change quite well. If the change was actually made by Massachusetts then I can see why they would have felt like they should change the statute in the Manual. However, was it really a law that the church had to change it in the Manual? What does the change in the word signify? It means that anyone who lives in Massachusetts can become a board of directors. The way it was originally written meant that the members of the board had to be citizens of the United States of America. Do we allow non-American citizens to become President of the United States? (We are not supposed to do it. There was good reason why the President must be a citizen of the United States. Now I am not so sure it matters because today socialism is quite popular in the United States of America.)
Another important change, that they say Mary Baker Eddy approved of but have never shown any true evidence of this, is the addition of the words “and Branch Churches” on pages 120 and 127. Their proof of evidence is to quote Mary Baker Eddy from something called Church in Action News and Announcements from the Directors of November 1977.
“It has sometimes been assumed that Mrs. Eddy did not authorize the added words. On the contrary, she both saw and gave her handwritten approval to the proof sheets of the 89th edition containing this and several other small changes, thus making that edition the last of the ‘subsequent editions’ with changes approved by her after the 73rd that ‘shall be cited as authority’ (Church Manual, art. XXXV, Sect. 2).” (p. 24)
The Manual reads: “Seventy-third Edition the Authority. Sect. 2. The Board of Directors, the Committee on Bible Lessons, and the Board of Trustees shall each keep a copy of the Seventy-third Edition and of subsequent editions of the Church Manual; and if a discrepancy appears in any revised edition, these editions shall be cited as authority.” (CM; p. 104)
I ask, “Who has ever seen these handwritten approvals to the proof sheets of their 89th edition of the Church Manual?” Because there have been such controversies over this 89th Manual, would it not be simple enough to show these approvals to the Field? I think it would be easy enough to do so. And it would settle the matter once and for all.
In the last paragraph they write, that these changes were “not an afterthought but rather represents a culmination of two decades of her consistently expressed desire that ‘the same form of religious worship shall be observed by all the churches of our denomination.’” (p. 24)
Again, where is the proof her “consistently expressed desire that ‘the same form of religious worship shall be observed by all the churches of our denomination'”? Is her quote taken out of context? Let us see the whole quote that they quoted from and not a portion of it!
The Great Deception is Anderson’s next section (page numbers starting over again). One deception that The Mother Church began to present to the world is that our Christian Science Textbook is not a denominational book. Yet, in the above quote from Mary Baker Eddy she says “the churches of our denomination.” Anderson says, “This is sheer treason, not only to our denomination, but also to the world at large. Such a gross misrepresentation is an unforgivable lie.” (p. 1)
Two meanings for denomination are “name, designation; esp : a general name for a category” and “a religious organization uniting in a single legal and administrative body a number of local congregations.” (Both are from Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary)
This being said, would the fact that there tends to be the idea to make the Textbook nondenominational be an attempt to separate the Textbook from the name of Christ Science? This separation would be an attempt to turn the Textbook into just another self-help book of New Age philosophy. It is an attempt to have the Textbook used to make you materially healthy, materially wealthy and intellectually wise.
“Opposite to good, is the universal claim of evil that seeks the proportions of good. There may be those who, having learned the power of the unspoken thought, use it to harm rather than to heal, and who are using that power against Christian Scientists. This giant sin is the sin against the Holy Ghost spoken of in Matt. ixx. 31, 32.” Mis 55:9” (page 2)
Over on page 4 Anderson speaks about the Russian (communistic) term misinformation (which was originally disinformation). She quotes:
“One of the principles of good, effective disinformation is that you psychologically manipulate the environment so that people will not know what they are looking at, even if they see it. Another is that the creation of similar, hoaxed decoy cases, if strategically executed and played out-will hide the real phenomenon, or at least draw peoples’ attention away from the real events. And yet another is that if all else fails, and the secrecy is ended, people will be so confused about the real versus the memorex, that they will be easily manipulated to the covert project’s agenda.
“Everyone in counter-intelligence knows that really good disinformation contains some elements of the truth, thereby making the false information or events more believable to the targeted recipients.’ (Excerpt from a paper written by Stephen Greer in 2000)”
What Anderson writes is correct. “Unless the originals [I assume she means original documents] are at hand, there is no way to know the accurate history of the Christian Science Church. There has been so much historical revisionism and distortion, that the truth has been completely obliterated.” (p. 4) One of these revisionists is author Robert Peel (unless he is not the true author of his third book). Not everything written in The Years of Authority is incorrect, but much of it is misleading.
On page 7 she quotes from Robert Peel’s book Mary Baker Eddy—The Years of Authority. The book was published by the CSPS in 1977. The quote is from page 346.
“To some of those around her it seemed that working together under the Manual would be anything but simple when Mrs. Eddy was no longer available to supply the authorization or signature required for the functioning of certain existing and essential bylaws.” Actually, it would have been very simple if the men in charge had been spiritually minded and obedient to the estoppel clauses in the Church Manual. “Would not the whole Manual, in fact, become inoperable if and when the Board of Directors could no longer obtain her written assent to actions made necessary by these very bylaws?” Yes! Now you are getting it!
“William Rathvon, as a household member who saw her withdraw further each day mentally from the direction of church affairs [would her “withdraw” be because she knew that material organized church was not “The Way”?], was particularly concerned by this contingency [“something liable to happen as an adjunct to something else” Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary. The something liable to happen, as the men saw it, was the death of the little old grey-haired woman.]. After consulting with Hanna and Smith—both of them lawyers [fact] and both sharing his concern [Peel’s opinion, not a fact]—he came up with a plan for the formation of an advisory council to act in Mrs. Eddy’s place if she were unable to give the necessary signature to actions proposed under the bylaws in question.
“[Adam] Dickey, however, refused to present the plan to Mrs. Eddy. …But he felt strongly that it would be a mistake to present the plan to her, and finally Rathvon found the reassurance he needed in a conversation with her lawyer cousin, General Baker. ‘You need not be at all uneasy,’ Baker emphatically told him when he raised the point about the bylaws which required her signature [a.k.a. the estoppel clauses].
“‘It is a matter of common law [not spiritual law] in a case of this kind, where it is physically impossible to carry out specified conditions by the one named, that the next in authority assume that jurisdiction. And in this case the next in authority is the Board of Directors of The Mother Church. Any competent court in the land will uphold the Manual just as Mrs. Eddy intends it to function whether her signature is forthcoming or not.’”
Let me rephrase that last sentence, “Any competent court in the United States of America that is spiritually minded, that can spiritually interpret God’s By-Laws, just as Mary Baker Eddy intended the Manual to function when the estoppel clauses are obeyed by the church members, this spiritually minded court will uphold the Manual. When this is done there is no need for her signature at all because you will lay down material organization as she had planned.”
Anderson talks about Monday, November 28, 1910 when Mary Baker Eddy wrote the words, “It took a combination of sinners that was fast to harm me.” She reports that Robert Peel (in the same book as mentioned above) wrote the date as being November 26th instead of the 28th. Also, the way Peel wrote it up he made it sound as if it “was an outside attack that troubled her. One only need read the real history presented here to see that it was ‘the enemy within’ that was the dilemma. How my heart goes out to this woman. In her last hours on earth, to realize that those around her were ready to betray her and all of the work that had been accomplished. What a sad tale to have to tell.” (p. 9)
Following this she gives Mr. Carl Lundstrom’s report of his visit to Chestnut Hill (the home that Mary Baker Eddy lived in) in September of 1979. It gives a detailed report of what the sister of household worker Adelaide Still experienced on December 3, 1910. She, Laura Sargent and Calvin Frye saw Mary Baker Eddy standing by her bed and her corporeal body that was in the bed the night of the “so-called” death. They were told by Archibald McLellan (board member) not to speak of this to anyone, ever.
So after December 3, 1910 one newspaper announces “FIVE DIRECTORS SUPREME,” another writes, “MOTHER CHURCH DIRECTORS CLAIM FULL AUTHORITY,” another writes, “CHURCH MANUAL GIVES DIRECTORS AMPLE AUTHORITY,” another writes, “Directors Claim All Necessary Power,” another writes, “BOARD TAKES UP MRS. EDDY’S WORK, Directors Meet and Announce Control of Christian Science Affairs,” and another writes, “Boston Directors Eager to Retain Temporal Power WOULD END SINGLE CONTROL”. Is there any wonder why the Field was fooled, or taken in, when the newspapers printed what the directors told them?
On page 32 Anderson provides an excerpt from the Memoirs of Judge Septimus J. Hanna. I typed it as it is in the book (emphasis was added by Anderson). The quote is from Document 28 found further on in her book. The only change is my interpolation.
“At the permanent burial at Mt. Auburn Cemetery, January 26, 1911, newsmen looked a last time on her face. It was unchanged though 7 weeks had passed since the funeral [on December 8, 1910]. Now the open view plate was closed forever and the casket loaded onto a hearse. Horses and men began drawing it the quarter mile to the waiting tomb. But suddenly appeared with the procession an unidentifiable lady. Who was she? Everyone had been admitted to the high-fence-enclosed cemetery by ticket only. All identifications had been verified. And all other people had been removed by caretakers before the Eddy procession had arrived. Only men had been invited. The day was cold, not fit for a woman to be there. Newspapers finally presumed the woman was the funeral director’s assistant. She had, 7 weeks before, prepared the body for burial. But the director denied that she was at Mt. Auburn! The woman was as unrecognized to all in that final cemetery procession of Mary Baker Eddy as was Jesus to Mary Magdalene when she met him, risen, beside the sepulcher of the Arimathaean.”
There is a sentence that follows the above quote on the original document. It reads: “And there are many other eye and ear witnesses that Mary Baker Eddy is not dead.” This being said, why did the board of directors insist on stating that Mrs. Eddy (as they always called her) was dead over, and over, and over again.
In Hanna’s Memoirs there are two paragraphs above the one just quoted. These two paragraphs explain why Mary Baker Eddy’s body was buried. He writes: “Mrs. Eddy had accomplished her goal in 19 [the year is missing on the page, I assume it is the year 1910, or perhaps it is the year in which the 73rd edition was printed (as spoken of previously)]. She froze the Manual as a rod or iron. With a dead body evident in 1910, a court could not make Mrs. Eddy a ward nor declare her, if she had ascended, a missing person, giving itself or others power to lead for 7 years until she be declared dead or found. The Mother Church now for all time must be administered exactly as she outlined, with no changes, or nullifications, all to be guarded by officers and members studying the Manual and watching as required by Article I.
“But Mrs. Eddy plainly labeled the conspirators: To Judge Hanna, she called them a ‘cabal.’ To Ira Knapp she wrote that they were a ‘triumvirate’. The last words she wrote were: ‘God is my life’. But the second to the last words were: ‘A combination of sinners that was fast is all that could injure me.’”
These sinners resided within the Church.
Judge Hanna seemed to think that the strange woman in black was Mary Baker Eddy. Anderson writes, “No one could recognize the lone woman that was present in the funeral procession as it wended its way to the final resting-place of Mary Baker Eddy. Is history repeating itself two thousand years later? Could the woman have been Mary Baker Eddy? How the reader perceives it will determine his progress spiritward.” (p. 33)
Is the reason why Mr. Rathvon saw “Mrs. Eddy” as becoming mentally distant from church affairs because she was working on solving a more important issue? She was working on transformation, she was “mentally working” on being a Spirit-being instead of a matter-being (the men who wanted control over the church believed her to be a matter-being). But she had to do it differently from the way Jesus did it. Jesus was supposed to resurrect the corporeal body before ascending while Mary Baker Eddy had to leave evidence of a corporeal body behind in order to save her Church (as Hanna explains it).
On page 35 there is an article, July 1994 Journal, by Virginia S. Harris (board member) about the new “Trade Edition” Science and Health. She wrote, “…We are a church awake and active, we are attuned to the voices of our time, and we are a wonderously evangelical people, casting abroad the good news of Christ’s precious Science.” (p. 36)
Anderson writes below this quote, “So, from 1911 until this day, the desecration of our beloved Science and Health continues. Also, Mrs. Eddy never referred to the members as evangelists, but rather:
“‘The new Evangel (Marginal heading)
“‘This angel or message which comes from God, clothed with a cloud, prefigures divine Science. To mortal sense Science seems at first obscure, abstract, and dark; but a bright promise crowns its brow. When understood, it is Truth’s prism and praise. When you look it fairly in the face, you can heal by its means, and it has for you a light above the sun, for God ‘is the light thereof.’ Its feet are pillars of fire, foundations of Truth and Love. It brings the baptism of the Holy Ghost, whose flames of Truth were prophetically described by John the Baptist as consuming error.’ S&H 558:9
“In Science, we learn that the only work is done in our own thought. We are always working out from perfection. If that is true, why do you need people running around trying to correct what God has mistakenly forgotten?”
“This angel or message” is the angel spoken of in Revelation 10. In the Edifice Vestry’s South wall are two painted windows. One is of JESUS WITH THE WOMAN OF SAMARIA (spoken of in St. John chapter 4) the other is the ANGEL OF REVELATION 10. In the first window there are two women depicted. Why? Does the woman by the well represent Mary Baker Eddy (as her church is a testament to her)? Is the second woman just to fill up empty space, or was there really a symbolic reason why she is there? Is this second woman the seventh angel who comes after the second woe? There must be a reason why Mary Baker Eddy paired up these two windows. Is it possible that the two women depicted below represent the right foot of divine Science and left foot of Christian Science, the two feet of the angel of Revelation 10?
The following is found n the Sentinel of September 5, 1994: “Need one be a Christian Scientist to understand it? It’s a nondenominational book. Among church members it’s called ‘the Christian Science textbook,’ but Mrs. Eddy chose not to put the words ‘Christian Science’ on the front cover. It’s not a book just for church members. It has many readers worldwide, including doctors, ministers of other churches, people in all walks of life.” (p. 37)
Anderson responds with a quote from Mary Baker Eddy: “Finally, brethren, wait patiently on God; return blessing for cursing; be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good; be steadfast, abide and abound in faith, understanding, and good works; study the Bible and the textbook of our denomination; obey strictly the laws that be, and follow your Leader only so far as she follows Christ.” (’01 34:20; emphases added by Anderson)
One reason why Mary Baker Eddy did not put the words “Christian Science” on the front cover is because God gave her the title of Science and Health, which means “salvation”. Anderson writes below the 1901 Message to The Mother Church: “The Board of Directors not only took over the textbook, but now they state that it is a nondenominational book.” (p. 37)
And after this was done they began to meddle with the Quarterly (publication of the weekly Bible lessons) – Thanksgiving of 1995. I will quote the quote and put in brackets what they so conveniently decided to leave out. “…In her Explanatory Note about the Lessons, Mrs. Eddy wrote, The Bible and the Christian Science textbook are our only preachers. [We shall now read scriptural texts, and their correlative passages from our denominational textbook,–these compose our sermon.] The canonical writings, together with the word of our textbook, corroborating and explaining…” (pages 37 & 38)
Next (p. 38) is about the circulation of literature, the board of directors want the Field to read literature only published by the Christian Science Publishing Society (really the board). This dates September 1997. Mary Baker Eddy placed in the Church Manual the following: “Books to be Published. SECT. I. Only the Publishing Society of The Mother Church selects, approves, and publishes the books and literature it sends forth. If Mary Baker Eddy disapproves of certain books of literature, the Society will not publish them. The Committee on Publication are in no manner connected with these functions. A book or an article of which Mrs. Eddy is the author shall not be published nor republished by this Society without her knowledge or written consent.” (emphases added by Anderson; pages 38 & 39)
Anderson asks, “And how do they get around that By-Law? In 1910 the Board of Directors removed her name as Pastor Emeritus, at her passing, and in essence took on the title for themselves. Once that is accomplished, the house and all its contents are theirs.” (p.39) I ask, who then is allowed to publish the works of Mary Baker Eddy? Are people who are not a part of the Christian Science Publishing Society allowed to publish her works?
The rest of this section continues up to page 43, then comes the section Documentation for “The Great Deception” which contains the documentation for this present section. Documentation for “The Great Deception” contains 36 documents. There is an interesting article from November 17, 1997 of Forbes Magazine. Anderson covers this document on pages 40-43 in The Great Deception. The article of Forbes Magazine consists of statements made by chief executives or chief executive officers, a founder and president of a club and their successors. One, however, is a statement made by one of The First Church of Christ Scientist’s board of directors, Virginia Harris. Now I want you to see if you can find the errors, mistakes, or lies (?) that she puts forth.
Christian Science Church
The founder [I think it should be Founder] of the Christian Science Church, Mary Baker Eddy, faced the issue of her death and succession over 100 years ago. In 1892 she set up the first five-person board of directors and established the succession plan. The five of us who serve on the board of directors function as one in the sense of one full-time chief executive officer, but each of us has our own area of the organization we head up. We serve for life.
If I were to die today, the four would meet and pray that they choose the best candidate. Because we are a self-perpetuating board, I see our leadership as about perpetuating the vision, rather than about a personal style or about myself.
Did you spot what is incorrect? Does Harris even know Christian Science history? Or does she know it and lie on purpose? Because what she said is wrong, means that either she lied or she is ignorant of church history!
Harris is totally incorrect when she says that in 1892 she (Mary Baker Eddy) set up the first five-person board of directors. She did get the year correct, so I think she just lied about it being five members. In 1892 there were only four directors! The Church Manual proves this fact on page 128. So did Virginia Harris even read the Church Manual? To me this seems most unlikely. The succession plan for the four directors, they are not even called directors on page 128, was set up in 1892. The words read, “…Ira O. Knapp, William B. Johnson, Joseph S. Eastaman, and Stephen A. Chase as trustees as hereafter provided and to their legitimate successors in office [notice it does not say “to my legitimate successor in office” by “to their legitimate successors in office”] forever, …” It is over on page 130 that the Manual states:
- Said grantees shall be known as the “Christian Science Board of Directors,” and shall constitute a perpetual body or corporation under and in accordance with section one, Chapter 39 of the Public Statutes of Massachusetts. Whenever a vacancy occurs in said Board the remaining members shall within thirty days fill the same by election; but no one shall be eligible to that office who is not in the opinion of the remaining members of the Board a firm and consistent believer in the doctrines of Christian Science as taught in a book entitled ‘Science and Health,’ by Mary Baker G. Eddy beginning with the seventy-first edition thereof.”
Notice there is no such mention of the board members serving until they die. In fact, Virginia Harris herself never served as a board member until she died!
Now, about that fifth director…the fifth director never had permanent legal standing. It was not until 1903 that the fifth director was appointed and when the time came that Archibald McLellan’s service ended (which was July 18, 1917) it was illegal for the remaining four members to appoint a successor for him! So, there is subterfuge in Harris’s words. For those who are interested, Virginia S. Harris is in the succession line of Ira O. Knapp.
It is also a fact that when Mary Baker Eddy spoke of her successor in 1901 she made it clear that it was not any MAN on earth at that time (1901)! This meant that the Board of Directors, even the fifth one appointed two years later, were not Mary Baker Eddy’s successors!
I would like to know which areas of the “organization” that these five members are supposed to “head up”! Out and out lie: “We serve for life.” Harris expected to die, as she said, “If I were to die today…” What happened about her following the works of Christ where she is expected to ascend out of material life? This is the problem with the vast majority of board members. They actually believe they are corporeal beings and that they will die. Mary Baker Eddy tells us that death is an illusion.
Anderson writes: “The four-member Christian Science board of Directors was made up of four men… The five-member Board was not formed until the 28th Edition of the Church Manual in 1903. There is no provision in the Manual that provides for a member to ‘serve for life’ on that Board. In reading the Deed of Trust you see that the four-member Board of 1892, is the self-perpetuating Board, not the five-member board. The five-member Board was not formed to replace the four-member Board, as Mary Baker Eddy did not amend the Deed of Trust. In fact, she could not legally add someone to the four-member Board. How woefully ignorant they are.” (p. 41)
The next section is called Science Obscured. After her “Table of Contents” she presents “Points to Ponder.”
In this section she tells how the Boston Center asked (in 1920) for all of the older Sentinels and Journals to be returned (to Boston), “making the claim that they wanted to bind them in complete sets. But it is known definitely that thousands of copies have been burnt up and that the fire included all copies of the first, second and third editions that were available.” It does not say what editions are meant here – I am assuming it means the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd editions of the Textbook. Can you imagine the nerve of Boston to burn our Leader’s precious books? It is a well-known fact that the Church Archives were practically impossible to get into to do research! Hopefully this has changed since the Library was built, but by the time this happened the whole history could have been changed to suit the needs of the hierarchy.
A big portion of the end of the book speaks about the “Houston meeting” of 2000. Virginia S. Harris headed up the meeting. This is when the duties for the office of Committee on Publication were changed. These changes are discussed on comment pages by one of the attendees of the meeting of Friday, July 20, 2000, for the closed Committee on Publication Session. There is a lot of information here, and it is of much importance.
It was written that this meeting was “an attempt to separate the discovery from its founding.” A comment about the Houston meeting is about who was actually present – approximately 320 attendees. Out of the 320 were 53 Committees on Publication, 27 members of the Board of Lectureship, approximately 30 staff members were there from the Committee office, Lectureship office and Board of Directors. “That leaves approximately 210 workers who have no specific Manual basis for their ever increasing authorized work. And they were zealous!” I ask why they outnumbered the legitimate Manual based attendees? Who were these 210 zealous workers? Were they even Christian Scientists? Yet, in the August 31, 2000 letter the author reports the attendance as follows: “It brought together for the first time five departments [because there were only two of the five departments that were Manual approved, the other three were made up] of The Mother Church: the North American Committees on Publication (53 + 18 staff), Board of Lectureship (27 + 8 staff), Publisher’s representatives for bookstores (44) [made up], Science and Health coordinators (65) [made up], and Reading Room representatives (46) [made up]. With the addition of 41 staff from The Writings of MBE [I think this was also made up.] and 15 other guests, the total conference attendance was greater than 300.” The total would be 317. It is worth mentioning that four of the five departments are directly controlled by The First Church’s board of directors which permits “far greater field involvement and control by T[he]M[other]C[hurch] than we have traditionally experienced in our church. By roping the COP into the group, it also asserts greater centralized control over the one activity that historically has been least controllable.” (August 31, 2000 letter)
Another quote about the meeting is, “The overtone of the conference was one of a new age Amway business.” And apparently, their main goal was to sell the Textbook to “seekers” (a new definition for the word meaning “not a Church member”).
One thing that Anderson does not really go into is the fact that the board of directors has made many decisions in getting rid of things with the excuse that such items (like pictures of Mary Baker Eddy) lead to idolatry of her persona. Yet around 2000 the hierarchy had made a complete change of mind, one where they were willing to idolize Mary Baker Eddy’s persona in order to promote the selling of her Textbook to “seekers” of Truth. A quote from the author of the comments, on the 2000 Houston meeting, is of importance: “We are turning from the leadership of Mary Baker Eddy to the person of Mary Baker Eddy — much like the Christian church turned from the Christ to the person of Jesus in the evolution of that institution.” I say it would have had to be a material evolution not a spiritual evolution of that institution.
In this meeting there “was no mention of healing ourselves or others. We were not brought together to share ideas on how to heal, how to handle the suggestions of animal magnetism, of what the signs of the times are and how we, as a church, should move forward in dealing with them. The attitude is one of ‘well, prayer alone hasn’t worked, so we now are going to actually do something. We’re going to sell the textbook. And we are going to tell Mrs. Eddy’s story so that everyone today can relate to her.”
Another topic that Anderson did not cover is this: Is the way they were going to tell Mary Baker Eddy’s story the right way? What book or books would they use? One biography, which was an attack on our Leader as far as I am concerned, turned out to be Gillian Gill’s biography Mary Baker Eddy. The Church heavily promoted this book especially when they put on their Library tour around the country (I went to a local presentation held at a Library). Gill was a feminist and she had no idea what Christian Science is even about. So how could she understand Mary Baker Eddy’s Life, little loan her Light?
That Saturday afternoon’s general session was the presentation of the Library. (I am sure that “Ginny” or Virginia used the name of Mrs. Eddy during her presentation, that it was the author of these notes that abbreviated her name.
“Ginny told us the MBE has very quickly moved to the front of public thought and this justifies our presentation of the library [This is probably because PBS ran a very bad biography video about Mary Baker Eddy and a feminist (who was also on the PBS show) was writing a biography about Mary Baker Eddy]. She told of the letter MBE received from President Roosevelt responding to her article on peace during his presidency and how she wrote on the back of the envelope, ‘Save this forever’. Then Ginny held up a piece of paper and said,
“‘“Save this forever.” I think Mrs. Eddy knew this day was coming.’
“We were told again, ‘Don’t resist this. Don’t react. Don’t judge.’ ‘We have loved and protected Mrs. Eddy for too long. We need to share her with others. They need to know her and that’s why we are building a library for her. We need to have her records to know what she accomplished. The Library is not a monument to Mary Baker Eddy but rather a repository of her ideas.’”
First off, what did the Church need to protect Mary Baker Eddy from or who? Have they really loved their Leader when they have disobeyed her Church Manual estoppel clauses since December 3, 1910? These directors are using Mary Baker Eddy in order to promote their agenda just like the board of directors have always misused the Church Manual (since December 3, 1910) to promote their agenda. It continues:
“Ginny introduced the former archivist of the USA and Don Wilson then spoke to us for about an hour on the purpose of and needs for the library.
“‘You need a living institution rather than a record of written materials.’
“That’s why the library will include so much more than just her writings. It will be the place for holding symposia, conferences, children’s programs, educational programs, a computer research area; it will disseminate publications, host exhibits and serve as a cultural and arts center.
“Ginny then told us that we will partner with other institutions and organizations—she sees us partnering with Harvard Medical School [really, Christian Science partnering with a medical school?], with schools of divinity like Andover Seminary. Ginny said that there is great hunger for knowledge of this wonderful person.”
I am not sure that any of what she spoke of, in the last paragraph, actually happened, but I am sure they attempted it. She said that she committed $50 million to the library, but was it her own money she was committing? No, it would come from the Renewal and Restoration fund (donations made by members).
Remember the title of the sixth chapter from the Textbook is “Science, Theology, Medicine”? Ask yourself in this next quote, “Where is Science at?”
“The library ‘intersects with the world in theology, medicine, women’s leadership, business management, journalism, the arts, and God knows what else,’ Ginny Harris. This is to meet the need in the current ‘intellectual ferment.’”
Once, after I sent in a testimony (before 2000) to the Christian Science Publishing Society they wrote back telling me that they could not print it because it was too intellectual! I responded with, “Well, if that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black!”
“The Library will stand alone as a legal, financial separate entity [but paid for with Church donations]. It is created under the Manual provision for ‘trusts [should be “trusteeships”] and syndicates.’”
What is the “provision”?
“Trusteeships and Syndicates. Sect. 8. Boards of Trustees and Syndicates may be formed by The Mother Church, subject to the approval of the Pastor Emeritus.” (Church Manual p. 27-28)
In other words, they could not build the library because the Pastor Emeritus, Mary Baker G. Eddy, never gave them approval to build it.
“GH spoke of the hunger for this personality. But shouldn’t we be realizing that man should have hunger and thirst after righteousness…and see that fulfilled.”
The world really is hungry for Mary Baker Eddy’s Life and Light! Mary Baker Eddy did not want us to look to her personality! But she knew it was important for her followers (students and pupils) to recognize and accept her place in Bible prophecy.
The author of these notes writes: “D. Wilson spoke of the consulting board being in agreement that we need a living institution rather than just a record of the written materials. But that is exactly what Mrs. Eddy gave us in her definition of Church. We do have that living institution…and we have the written word in her textbook.”
“Church. The structure of Truth and Love; whatever rests upon and proceeds from divine Principle.
“The Church is that institution [An institution can be the Textbook!], which affords proof of its utility [use] and is found elevating the race, rousing the dormant understanding from material beliefs to the apprehension of spiritual ideas and the demonstration of divine Science, thereby casting out devils, or error, and healing the sick.” (S&H 583:12-19; [My interpolations.])
The following statement seems a bit odd. “It’s a sad statement to suggest that NOW we will know what Mrs. Eddy accomplished because now we can read all that she ever wrote. That, prior to this library, we have not truly known what she accomplished.”
One reason why we did not read everything is because it was almost impossible to get into the Church Archives! But were we meant to read everything that Mary Baker Eddy wrote? John W. Doorly pointed out that people gave him letters written by Mary Baker Eddy. He destroyed them. He said the letters were written directly to people and were not meant to be read by others, the lessons were for the individual student. I am not sure that I agree with him destroying the letters, but perhaps he was correct in his assessment? And what seems really odd about the above statement is they say they do not know what she accomplished! Perhaps another thing their Library might help them understand is what Mary Baker Eddy sacrificed! How could they not know?
Next were notes on the Sunday afternoon session. “We then were introduced to Carol Hole who took us on a stroll down memory lane with all the different editions of Science and Health. Eventually the point was made that there have been quite a few versions [should be editions] when we were obedient to ‘keeping abreast of the times.’” Excuse me? What is this “when we were”? It was Mary Baker Eddy who wrote Science and Health, not “we”. This is just a ploy to say that Boston can do whatever they want to with the Textbook in order to keep it “abreast of the times,” the little parrot line they use when ever they want to make a change in any of the periodicals!
To continue with the quote: “There have been more than 400 editions of S&H. These different editions are now called ‘expressions of the edition.’ (Strange use of the word but it was continually used during the afternoon.) As Carol showed us the different versions, she made fun of some of them. A very sad thing. It was not professional or done with reverence.”
Who is this Carol Hole?
On the next page Ginny Harris is back at the podium. She announced that “we were all being given our own copy of the new ‘life-companioning’ version of the Trade edition. She picked up the book and started waving it over her head. As people were given their books, they joined the wave and eventually the room will [was?] silently filled with people following Ginny in waving their trade editions. (It was very spooky.)”
Next she spoke about the launching of a “Science & Health Web site in late September.”
“At the conclusion of the slide show and questions, we were all given a baseball cap with the words ‘seeking practical spirituality’ embroidered on it as well as the trade edition image embroidered with Science & Health…(with Key to the Scriptures indefinable) Ginny picked up her cap and started to wave again. Approximately 314 others picked up their caps and joined the wave. (Spooky.)”
“Having Science & Health on the Web is probably a good idea.
“But why are we not linking the reader with Church? Why leave the local community branch churches out of the loop?
“Under what authority are the articles being written? Why are we not placing the articles, the testimonies, and the daily lesson sermon all under their rightful Manual authority? That’s where the protection to the Cause and to the seeker, lies. There are proper checks and balances in the Manual. [As it is in the United States Government – world affairs reflect church affairs.] They seem to be lacking. The necessary wisdom and balance in the human organization seem to be falling away in the rush to use human ways and means so that we can be counted in the players on the web. The word ‘urgency’ was used in wanting and needing to be on the web. Not sure that is the reason to do this is this way.”
The Monday and Tuesday sessions were about the break out for Committees, regional teams and some general sessions reporting back to the whole. The author of the notes said that the “method of defining what I will do for the seeker in the next 6 months was challenging when I felt the goals were all wrong.” The one public offering the person gave was totally ignored at the end of the day. What was his offering? “During the next 6 months, I will take something in my individual experience and heal it so that I can fulfill the Manual by-law where Mrs. Eddy says, ‘by [my] individual practice I will demonstrate that Christian Science heals the sick quickly and wholly, thus proving this Science to be all that [I] claim for it…as stated in Science & Health.” (The interpolations in this paragraph were already in the text.)
Now this next section is important, they want spies! The author, a C.O.P. “was specifically asked – ‘since you would know from your practice’ who are the folks who are resistant to this new approach and who is for the new approach?” The writer says he “tap danced” around the issue. “I was horrified (silently and without facial expression) that this was the attitude toward the field – towards the branch churches and their right to govern themselves and serve their communities in their own prayerful way.”
“Reading rooms are now being encouraged to have their own budgets separate from the branch church so that they can act without the express permission of their branch church boards or memberships. They want the reading rooms to be accountable and obedient to the S&H coordinators in practice though in theory the branches are distinctly democratic.
“It would appear as though TMC has written off the field, written off branch churches as ineffective and unnecessary. They don’t have the vision, they don’t get it, they are resistant and so they are being left behind.” Actually, it might have been a good thing that the branches were left out of the whole merchandizing of Science and Health! To be honest, the wording I saw on my “Trade Edition” copy (a friend gave it to me) reminded me of the McDonald’s restaurant franchise!
“This attitude coupled with the specific charge to ‘get the church off the book’ seems to indicate the demise of our church as Mrs. Eddy set it up.”
Finally there is a brief report by someone else who was at the meeting, then closing statements by Christeen L. Anderson, and an Epilogue.
I do recommend the book to anyone who feels that something is rotten in Boston and it ain’t the beans!
I wish the book had continued on up to 2015. To end it at 2000 leaves a lot of unspoken territory. Perhaps there will be a sequel?
 The only reason why there was ever a need for a Church Manual is because the board of directors refused to do what Mary Baker Eddy asked them to do.
 This little book open is found in the angel’s (divine messenger’s) hands in Revelation 10.
 Infuses is added by me.
 I John 3:2
 S&H p. 590
 S&H p. 468
 There is actually a footnote placed here. It is the first footnote for this chapter of the book and this is where the Editor’s note, previously spoken of, is placed, where “citizens” is substituted with “residents”.
 From a letter to Arthur R. Fraser, dated March 23, 1920. The letter is from a Mr. T. J. Hampton of San Diego, California.
 Letter of August 31, 2000