by MJSmith

            I am not sure who first said these famous words:  “World affairs reflect church affairs.”  This means, that it is not the world affairs (man’s government of mortal laws) effecting material churches (material organizations) or even the divine Church (that which “rests upon and proceeds from divine Principle”), and this is an important point to remember.

            Church.  The structure of Truth and Love; whatever rests upon and proceeds from divine Principle.
            “The Church is that institution [which can be a textbook], which affords proof of its utility 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 interpolation.])

            Question. — Is there more than one God or Principle [government]?
            Answer. — There is not.  Principle and its idea is one, and this one is God, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent Being, and His reflection is man and the universe.  Omni is adopted from the Latin adjective signifying all.  Hence God combines all-power or potency, all-science or true knowledge, all-presence.  The varied manifestations of Christian Science indicate Mind, never matter, and have one Principle. (S&H 465:16-466:6; [My interpolation.])

            The following is from the 1946 Association Address of Mildred L. LeBlond, C.S.B.  I begin with the topic below, on page 19.  We should listen to this Christian Science Teacher’s words, as today there seems to be a misunderstanding of what the United States of America’s forefathers meant by there being a separation between church and state (government).  [My interpolations will be inside brackets.]  Also, I will always refer to our Leader as Mary Baker Eddy instead of “Mrs. Eddy” while quoting the Address.



            Church and government is a subject which Christian Scientists should approach with much deliberation, and rightly, too.  It is a subject coming to the front more and more, so it is one which must be understood.
            In defining church and government economically, we find that generally speaking, they are accepted as the spiritual and material aspects of a nation:  religion the spiritual aspect, and government the material.  Defined according to the teachings of divine Science, they are two aspects of the same thing:  Mind, wherein church and government is one, and that one is spiritual.
            Mary Baker Eddy defines church thus:  “The structure of Truth and Love; whatever rests upon and proceeds from divine Principle.[1]
            She says of government, “In the spiritual Genesis of creation, all law was vested in the Lawgiver, who was a law to Himself.  In divine Science, God is One and All; and, governing Himself, He governs the universe.[2]
            Church and government sustain and maintain each other in the demonstration of this Oneness.
            Now, here may I state my position very clearly.  What I am going to say is not to advocate anything in the line of politics or something to be done objectively, for my desire is to present this topic subjectively and indicate the need of understanding it in this way.  Christian Scientists cannot be indifferent to the demands of present government with regard to health, taxes, and private ownership.  These demands either allow the free demonstration of the Christian Science Movement [I prefer the word Cause], or they attempt to hinder it.  Mind is one indivisible consciousness, not half spiritual and half material.  What goes on as our government must express the same Principle as church.  If this is not being done, it is a house divided against itself.
            The Christian Scientist must realize his importance in world affairs.  He is the lawmaker, because to him has been revealed the law of scientific Being for all mankind.  This is his covenant with the world.  He is not dealing with persons, places and things.  He is working out and living the facts of Being.  He must not allow himself to be importuned into the acceptance of the proposition that he lives in a world of which he is a small part.  He knows he is all one, and that church and government is one in him.  Proceeding from Spirit, thought naturally evolves the modes and means of Spirit for both church and government, for Spirit is the only Lawgiver.
            When a Christian Scientist accepts or rejects a law concerning his city, his state, or his nation, he should do so on the basis of how it affects The Christian Science Movement.  This is imperative because in this Science of Christianity the individual is the fundamental unit.  It is as the individual that God is seen and understood and that church and government is understood as proceeding from the same Principle.  So the Christian Scientist should question himself, “Will this law promote the Christian Science Movement and the individual everywhere, or will it attempt to interfere with the free demonstration of this movement and attempt to state-ize the individual?”  [Would the use of marijuana pass in states if Christian Scientists were awake and doing their mental work?  Some Christian Scientists think the passing of its use is a good thing because it will help end the war on drugs!  But, is not Christian Science what has really waged war upon drugs?  Their logic is illogical.  And are there not other drugs out there that this so-called “war on drugs” is still facing – like cocaine, heroine, crack, etc., etc., etc.  Are we as a civilization supposed to make all of these drugs legal?  You all have heard the line, “Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile.”  Give them marijuana and they will take other drugs too (literally take them)!  Gary Johnson is running for President.  He claims that if he is elected he will legalize marijuana, probably because he is in the marijuana business and he uses his own product.]
            America was conceived and born of a desire to worship God in freedom, freedom from state control.  Until the discovery of America [I think this should read “Until the founding of American colonies”], all nations had a state religion, meaning by this that countries taxed their citizens for the maintenance of a state religion.  You will remember that it was the Roman Emperor Constantine who made the Christian religion the state religion of the Roman Empire, which was at that time practically the whole civilized world.  This took from Christianity its freedom and spirituality.  It is believed by some Bible students that this is the price paid by the early Christians for their liberation from the catacombs [and caves].
            From here on through what is historically called the Dark Ages, Christianity seemed lost, and in its place there developed a political [church] hierarchy, doing great injustice to the individual.  Finally, began the movement of protesting by those in England, Germany, France and Bohemia, which culminated later in the group known as the Puritans.  The Puritans, who came to America and are known as the Pilgrims, founded this country on the basis of religious and political freedom, thus separating church and government.  The founding fathers arranged by written law that this country could never tax its citizens for the support of a state religion, and that individual freedom included religious as well as economic and political freedom.  [The separation between church and state (government) had to do with money – not thought processes!  What I mean is that this separation was not a separation saying that government lands, buildings, and peoples could not bring their religion into government buildings, structures, and not have it stricken from the records or not have their laws based upon God, it only meant that they would not be taxed money because they were a member of some church.  And the idea of separation between church and state had absolutely nothing to do at all with atheism.  It is only in the material world, run by material laws, where a separation between church and state seems to be a necessity.]
            In order to clear what might seem like conflicting viewpoints, explanatory remarks are perhaps necessary.  From the historical background just given, it can be seen that the world has been demonstrating the separation of church and state.  As I have stated, however, according to Christian Science, church and government is understood as proceeding from the same Principle.  Just to be sure that no one believes that I am advocating a union of church and state, or that I am repudiating our country’s demonstration of individual freedom, may I say that when church and government operate materially, it is error, as seen in the Roman Catholic hierarchy [and the Christian Science hierarchy].  But, …when church and government operate as one consciousness, the consciousness of the individual who knows that his Mind is God, it is Truth.  The only true union of church and state is in individual consciousness.
            In the demonstration of Scientific Being, this is inevitable, for has not Mary Baker Eddy stated, “One infinite God, good…annihilates pagan and Christian idolatry, – whatever is wrong in social, civil, criminal, political and religious codes.[3]
            Some fourteen years ago [around 1932], when some very definite measures of social government became evident, probably not many Christian Scientists thought there could ever appear a socialized law for public health.  But even then, it should have been reasoned that socialistic law, once in effect, may go to any length [give an inch, take a mile].  Here it is, the Watner-Murray-Dingell Bill for compulsory, or state-controlled medicine.  Many Christian Scientists have thought that if it should become law, it were best not to oppose it and go along with it [they were asleep]; and in this way, prove to the world that our system of healing is as good or better than those of the medical doctors.

            I stop here for now with the Address, in order to go back to that time period of 1932 and see what was going on in the Christian Science Church.
            “In the late nineteen-twenties and nineteen-thirties, a new [Christian Science] church or society was being formed every four or five days.  In 1931, among the 2,519 branch churches and societies, and forty college and university organizations, was the first branch church in Poland.  In 1932, the first branches of The Mother Church were formed in Greece, in Belgium, and in Czechoslovakia; and in 1933, in Nairobi, in the British crown colony of Kenya in East Africa, a new branch was founded 2,000 miles away from the nearest Church of Christ, Scientist.
            “In Cairo was another church, the first in Egypt; there were two branches in Brazil, and five additional branches in Australasia[n].  In 1933, there were 2,639 branch churches and societies, forty-seven college and university organizations and, devoting full time to the healing work of Christian Science were 10,747 practitioners and 505 nurses.”[4]
             “Without a doubt, the Christian Science movement was prospering in every way.  Besides the burgeoning churches and societies, lavish spending on the sanatoriums at Chestnut Hill and Arden Wood, as well as the Pleasant View Home seemed to demonstrate the limitless possibilities of the Christian Science organization.  Branches, societies, and class associations poured money into Boston to support each new project and to sustain those already completed.
             “Christian Scientists in the field attributed all of these signs of progress to the Board of Directors who were held in great reverence and were considered to be the most advanced students of Christian Science in the world [the Field was asleep].  For this reason whatever plan, suggestion, or admonition the Directors might announce was accepted without question in the field.  Loyalty to the Board was considered to be the true test of a genuine Christian Scientist. [Remember, world affairs reflect church affairs, so if God’s true Church for the Sixth Day of Truth is the Christian Science Church, then if something is rotten in Boston then the world is going to reflect that same rottenness.]
            “The Board’s instructions appeared in a constant stream in the periodicals.  Their number and frequency increased greatly after the litigation regarding the Publishing Society.  The June 1930 Journal warned against making and using copies of articles appearing in the periodicals:  ‘Thus the addition of the letter “n” to the little word “or” has worked havoc with many a message.’  The July 1930 issue gave extended instructions to First Readers in branch churches regarding the proper extent of their authority in discipline and the conducting of meetings.  [Yet, the Branch Churches were set up by Mary Baker Eddy to be run as independent Church bodies – set up like the fifty states of the United States of America.]
            “In [the] September 1930 Journal [there was] announced a new biography of Mrs. Eddy by Lyman P. Powell entitled, Mary Baker Eddy, A Life Size Portrait.  Dr. Powell was a rector of a Protestant Episcopal church in New York City who had originally been hostile to Mrs. Eddy.  The appearance of his new book was a welcome event which would counteract the Daken biography which appeared the year before.  The Powell book was endorsed by the Board of Directors who had worked closely with the author and allowed him access to many documents in their keeping.
            “At about this same time, Clifford P. Smith at The Mother Church was collecting material for his own biography of Mrs. Eddy.  In 1931, he asked Gilbert C. Carpenter of Providence, Rhode Island, to submit to him his recollections of the year he had spent in Mrs. Eddy’s household from April 16, 1905 to April 16, 1906.  Mr. Carpenter had joined The Mother Church in 1896; he had primary class instruction from Eugene H. Greene; and he was asked by Mrs. Eddy to be chairman of the building committee for the Extension in 1902.  She called him to Pleasant View in 1905, and when he left after serving one year, she conferred the C.S.B. degree upon him – the only time she is known to have given this degree after so short a time.  While he held the C.S.B. degree, he never taught classes in Christian Science.
            “Gilbert Carpenter set about recording his experiences with the view of correcting the inaccuracies and misimpressions left by such books as the one by Edwin Daken in 1929.  He completed his book entitled, Mary Baker Eddy, Her Spiritual Footsteps and had it copyrighted in 1934, with two copies going to the Library of Congress.  Clifford P. Smith was not pleased.  He had wanted an unpublished manuscript which he could use as source material for his own book.  The Directors immediately made efforts to have the copies removed from the Library of Congress and get the copyright rescinded.  However, by now the books were eagerly sought after, and people were traveling from all over the country to read the book.  For this reason, the Librarian of Congress, Archibald MacLeish…declined to hand the copies over.
            “The April 1935 Journal ran the following;  ‘…Even though the biographical undertakings of individuals may be executed with the best of motives, those who would serve The Mother Church will contribute their unpublished manuscripts of this nature to The Mother Church itself, and thus will perform an unselfish and loving service to the movement.  All of the points here discussed indicate the advisability of relying upon biographies of Mrs. Eddy issued with the genuine aid or approve of the Directors of The Mother Church and circulated by The Christian Science Publishing Society.’  [In other words the Board of Directors wanted total control over what was going to be written or said about Mary Baker Eddy.]
            “Now outside the orbit of The Mother church, John V. Dittemore [once a Director of the Board] had teamed up with Earnest Sutherland Bates to write an unfavorable biography of Mrs. Eddy in 1932.  [Part of the red dragon’s flood.]  The information used in this book came from a large collection of copied documents which Dittemore had acquired while still Clerk of The Mother Church.  [He also had Mary Baker Eddy’s secretary Calvin Frye’s diaries written while under her employ.  Dittemore adulterated these diaries.  I am not sure that the diaries were part of this collection or not.]
            “In 1933, Dittemore offered all of these documents for sale.  They were packed in a large trunk, and the asking price was $10,000.  A Roman Catholic priest had already offered $5,000, and Gilbert C. Carpenter and his son urged the Directors of The Mother Church to buy the trunk.  They refused to have any dealings with John V. Dittemore.  The Carpenters were able to strike a deal whereby they would get loan of the trunk for two weeks during which they could Photostat its contents.  They raised the required $400 with the help of the New York Library.  The Carpenters and the library would each get a set of the documents.  When the Board of Directors heard that the Carpenters had the trunk, they immediately agreed to pay the $10,000 for the Dittemore collection.  The Mother Church sent a representative to get the copies held by the Carpenters but left in despair on hearing that the New York Public Library had a set also.  It is not clear if the Directors ultimately retrieved the library’s copies.”  (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE After 1910, by Andrew W. Hartsook, page 52-54; [My interpolations.])
            On a different subject, “Another major project was on the drawing board in Boston which absorbed the attention of the Directors.  The July 1931 Journal announced the proposed construction of a greatly expanded Publishing Society.  A fund was opened for contributions from the field.  The United States and the world were in the midst of an economic depression which was reaching its depths in 1931.  The proposal, therefore, was met with skepticism and disbelief.  The December Journal gave the rationale for so large a project, and the January 1932 issue reminded people that previous church building had been done during hard economic times [when the original edifice was built].
            “The cornerstone was laid on October 17, 1932, and construction began in earnest in 1933.  The building contained marble from Italy, woodwork from England, mosaics from Germany, and tile from Czechoslovakia.  The new building also featured a unique Globe Room (later called the Mapparium).  Visitors could walk through the hollow globe on a walkway to see a model of the entire earth from a[n] unprecedented perspective.  The acoustic effect inside the globe would also prove to be a singular experience.  The project was completed on January 20, 1934.  It had been fully paid for seven months before actual completion.  The cost was $4,500,000.[5]
            “Even in the midst of the very difficult times, Christian Scientists dug deep into their pockets and made many personal sacrifices to keep faith with the Director’s call.  Apparently this fervor led to some unwise giving and alarmed the Board, because they caused to [be] printed in the January 1933 Journal a warning to branch churches to monitor their own financial condition and not neglect accumulating depts.  The April 1933 Journal offered to lend a movie film of the construction of the new publishing house to branch churches.
            “In 1932 a new, greatly expanded, hymnal was released, the first change since 1910.  That same year the Archives of The Mother Church were formally established.  Documents had been collected all along, and a call for Mrs. Eddy’s letters to be sent to Boston had gone out in 1917.  This call for her letters was renewed in the May 1934 Journal.  Donors were promised photostatic copies of their precious letters if they would send in the originals.  The formal beginning of the Archives coincided with the appointment of Clifford P. Smith as Editor of the Bureau of History and records, – a post he occupied until 1935.
            “It was John V. Dittemore who began collecting many of the documents which constituted the core of the present Archives.  It is ironic that he was also responsible for the collection which came into possession of the Carpenters.  Near the end of his life, he read Gilbert Carpenter’s Mary Baker Eddy, Her Spiritual Footsteps – the book disapproved of by the Directors – and remarked that ‘if he had had access to the book earlier, he never would have written of Mrs. Eddy in the way he did…The reading of the book brought him back to the fold.’[6]  At the end he wrote a letter of contrition to the Board of Directors which was printed in the August 1937 Journal. (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE After 1910, by Andrew W. Hartsook, p. 55-56; [My interpolations.])
            It was also in 1932 that the Board gained interest in radio broadcasting.
            LeBlond tells us about socialized laws taking place during this time.  What does Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary tell us about “socialism”?  It reads:  “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.”  Was this not exactly what the Board of Directors was beginning to do during this time period?  They wanted all the letters Mary Baker Eddy had written!  They wanted control of any biography having to do with Mary Baker Eddy!  They wanted control over it all, via their precious building up of the Publishing Society.  And the radio broadcasts figured into this too, for they wanted economic and political control of the Word going out to the world.
            Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary continues the definition with:  “a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state:  a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done”.
            If the Board of Directors is practicing socialism then can there be any surprise that they were the hidden reason behind the Watner-Murray-Dingell Bill and today – Obama Care?  Now to continue with the Association Address.

            The record does not show that our Leader established The First Church of Christ, Scientist by working along with the Roman Catholic, Jewish, or Protestant churches.  She came out from among them, and was separate.  In this way she prepared a place for all men scientifically to know God, and be healed.  As Jesus said, “I go to prepare a place for you.  And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that were I am, there ye may be also.[7]
            Right now [1946] we are experiencing compulsory health state laws in California which are already interfering with the religious freedom of the individual Christian Scientist in his ability to heal and be healed.  The Disability Benefits Bill, which is an amendment to the California Unemployment Insurance Law, passed the last California Legislature, and Christian Scientist have no exemptions.  The one percent taxation for unemployment benefits now covers sickness benefits.  It is compulsory taxation, and in a sense, a reversion to “taxation without representation.”  In order to have one’s money refunded from the government to pay for sickness bills, the law requires the applicant to have been ill seven days, and he must have a written certificate from a doctor or practitioner saying that the applicant is ill.  [Note that you must be “ill seven days” this should have stuck out to Mildred LeBlond!  These seven days are the opposite of God’s Seven Days – Genesis 1-2:3.]

            Again, I will stop here in order to return to history, to the year of 1946.  John W. Doorly is excommunicated from the Church on August 29, 1946.  He is the one who gave the explanation for the Word order of the Seven Days!  Is this why LeBlond failed to see the significance, because Doorly was excommunicated?
            “The final chapter in the trials of John Doorly was also played out in 1946.  ‘Paul Revere’[8] quoted a pamphlet sent out by Mr. Doorly:  ‘A group of thirty-seven Christian Science students from all over the United States, unable to believe that the Board of Directors would place their teacher on probation “on hearsay evidence,” went to Boston “to see the Board and place the facts before them.”  They were met by a “legal representative” of the Directors, who asked them if they were aware that they were “approaching the highest ecclesiastical court in the land’ (emphasis in original)[9]” (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE After 1910, by Andrew W. Hartsook, p. 87)
            Doorly wrote to the Board on June 8, in reply to the Board’s May letter:  “During this period of attack upon me, you have constantly been supplied with gossip and unproved accusations by what may now be regarded as a private gestapo, i.e., people who write you copiously about others, well knowing that they will never be called upon to prove a single statement they have made.  Your Board should know that such methods as these are universally condemned by all decent-minded people, and it is only a matter of time until these methods defeat their own ends…
            “‘The mistaken concept that five human beings can tell the rest of humanity exactly what Christian Science is, what they shall think, what they shall read, to whom they shall speak, when and what they shall write, is entirely out of harmony with the thought of our world today.  The Christian Science Church organization is in fetters, the fetters of vested interest, of conservatism, or conventionality, or autocracy, and of lack of vision, and your Board is chiefly responsible for these conditions.  The marvel is that with a disastrous record of fifteen years of declining membership and fading warmth, your Board does not see the hopelessness of the present policy.’[10]” (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE After 1910, by Andrew W. Hartsook, p. 87)
            Also, in 1946, the Board fought the publication and distribution of Arthur Corey’s book, Christian Science Class Instruction (I spoke more upon this topic in my Post SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM AND CAPITALISM).  In 1947 another book by another Christian Scientist would be printed as a limited edition for “private distribution” to the author’s “association of pupils and a few other friends”.[11]  This Christian Science teacher was Bliss Knapp.  Bliss Knapp was a loyal student of Mary Baker Eddy’s and he had known her since his childhood.  My guess is that the Board of Directors did not like the book because they were not making any money from the book and Knapp had not gotten their “approval” – a big no-no.  But I also believe that there was another reason why they were against the book.
            “Bliss Knapp’s Destiny [of The Mother Church] book included short biographies of his parents, a history of the church organization, the challenges of building The Mother Church, and an examination of the place of Mary Baker Eddy in Bible prophecy.  The final chapters were essentially an elaboration of ‘Mrs. Eddy’s Place’ published by the Directors in the periodicals in 1943, commonly called the ‘Six Points.’”[12]
            Oh, how the Board of Directors had changed their viewpoint since 1943 when the Mrs. Eddy’s Place had been published, for in their letter to Knapp dated February 20, 1947, they stated (in part), “In a word, neither the human identity of Jesus nor the human identity of Mrs. Eddy was known to God [a lie] or foreseen by the prophets [although the prophets may not have known their human identity they did spiritually see that God has two witnesses (two olive trees, two candlesticks) and wrote prophecy about them from Genesis all the way to Revelation], but as individual states of human consciousness they each [Jesus and Mary] in their own way [As divine messengers sent from God!] perceived and reflected the Christ [Mind], the true nature of God, in such marked degree [must be the Third Degree] that they became the human avenues of thought through which prophecy was fulfilled…[W]e[13] ask that as a first step you request the withdrawal of the book from the Library of Congress…In addition to withdrawing the book from the library, we recommend that, with the exception of such copies as may be essential for the purpose of editing, you call in all copies, so that both the books and the plates may be destroyed by you.”[14]
            The big lie that the same board members put forth (as they were the same ones that allowed the publication of Mrs. Eddy’s Place) in their paragraph is that God did not know who Jesus or who Mary Baker Eddy were!  “The Father in secret is unseen to the physical senses, but He knows all things and rewards according to motives, not according to speech.” (S&H 15:7-9)  I put forth, that if God knows “all things” then God knows “all His children”!  God told Jeremiah, “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:5)  The same can be said for Jesus and Mary Baker Eddy!
            Yet, a later Board of Directors (1990’s), with their greedy appetite for money, were willing to publish Knapp’s book as part of a biography series on Mary Baker Eddy in order to inherit Bliss Knapp’s wife’s estate.  (Except they refused to play along at first, so by the time they agreed to publish the book they had to share the estate.)  But they would sabotage the books release by sending out their Gestapo agents to the Branch Churches to preach false propaganda about the book.
            And now to continue with LeBlond’s Address.  Getting back to the need of a written certificate from a doctor or practitoner…

            What have such measures [of being ill seven days] to do with Christian Science practice?  Protestants, Jewish, Roman Catholic, or other forms of worship do not object to compulsory health laws because they do not interfere with their religion.  But the Christian Scientist is different.  He has to object because his religion is based on spiritual healing.  I, for one, would never consider practicing under such a law, but I would consider making such a law null and void.  When the state attempts to control health, it has already begun to take hold of, or interfere with, Christian Science.  Freedom to heal spiritually and mentally without interference is basic to our understanding of the Science of existence.  [Freedom to heal spiritually and mentally without interference from a hierarchical board of directors in Boston is also basic to our understanding of the Science of existence!]
            The time has come, is now, for the Christian Scientist to understand church and government as one, in his own consciousness, in order to demonstrate laws which will maintain religious freedom and individual rights, or the freedom of the Christian Science Movement [Cause].  “Religious liberty and individual rights under the Constitution of our nation are rapidly advancing, avowing and consolidating the genius of Christian Science.[15]
            Christian Scientists must do something about it.  Where?  How?  In or as their own consciousness, by continued enlightenment of what church and government is.  Then they will not vote for laws which would attempt to restrict the practice of Christian Science, nor fail to protest when such laws are under consideration or already in effect.
            Perhaps it will be said by some that this is a question which Christian Scientists should leave alone, that there is such a fine line drawn between that which is right and that which could be wrong, that they had better just leave it be.  Or, that if the majority want it or if it is for the greatest good and for the greatest number of people, Christian Scientists shouldn’t object or interfere.  I used to think that too, but not now.  This is a defeatist argument, and not one which scientific knowers accept.  Every avenue of Being must express Mind.
            Again, how is this accomplished?  By being and knowing Truth concerning any subject, or whatever name or nature.  At the present stage of development the important thing is the knowing – to understand what is transpiring.  But, …know, know, know.  Thought is dynamic when based on Principle.  Do not be afraid to take your position as Principle with regard to this question.  We are not afraid when something is expressed with regard to sin, sickness, death, and poverty; then ….should we be when the subject is economics, state, or federal law?  I think not!  The garment of Truth is without a seam; one whole garment.  [Likewise, Christian Scientists must begin to stand up for Truth within their own Church body, don’t be afraid of being excommunicated, don’t be afraid of being called a heretic!]
            As we have previously said, history records that Christianity and democracy have gone hand in hand through the centuries since the time of the Christian Era.  This is true because both are involved in the individual, or the individual consciousness.  Christian Scientist know that Christianity is the scientific demonstration of the Christ.  Mary Baker Eddy defines a Christian as “the highest style of man.”[16]
            Demo, the prefix to the word democracy, means people.  A Godly government, built upon the understanding of the Christ, is true democracy.  [Christian Scientists must also remember that the United States of America is a Republic.  “respublica, fr. res thing, wealth + publica, fem. of publicus public—more at real, public  1 a (1);  a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usu. a president (2):  a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government  b (1):  a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law  (2):  a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government  c:  a usu. specified republican government of a political unit…” (Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary)  Another name for the Republic is the Commonwealth.  A Christian Scientist understands this Commonwealth is the abundant supply that comes from God and is given to the public.  Of course, this abundant supply is subjectively spiritual supply being manifested in the objective as material supplies.]
            Church and government is therefore not a taboo subject.  It is only mortal belief, fear, or ignorance, that can attempt to separate church and government in the thinking of the Christian Scientist.  The study of Christian Science reveals this.  Shall Christian Scientists sit by and allow spurious laws and ideologies to attempt interference with the progress of the Christian Science Movement [Cause]?  I believe that once one sees how to work – that it is consciousness – timidity goes.  It is of vital importance to world affairs that this subject be cleared by the understanding of the teaching of Christian Science.  We must be willing to accept the fact that it has to be worked out mentally:  that because consciousness is one, we cannot have a spiritual church and a material government.  Church and government are two aspects of the same thing, Mind, and are therefore in accord with each other because of expressing the same Mind.  Mary Baker Eddy shows it to us in the following statement:
            Unconstitutional and unjust coercive legislation and laws, infringing individual rights, must be ‘of few days, and full of trouble.’  The vox populi, through the providence of God, promotes and impels all true reform; and, at the best time, will redress wrongs and rectify injustice.  Tyranny can thrive but feebly under our Government.[17]
            Thus righteous government will be demonstrated as one with church – not as pressure groups, or human politics, or balance of power, – but as individual consciousness, divine consciousness, as the result of understanding the Science of Being.  The representatives of the people, in government or church affairs, reflect the condition of the thought of the people.  To clear any situation in these avenues of thought, it must first be seen and done as the individual.  There is always a voice of the people, but that voice is not heard until the individual becomes conscious of his responsibilities and the power of his Being because of his oneness with God.  The voice of the people will be understood as the presence of God, omnipresence.  Divine consciousness will be demonstrated as the City Foursquare in which we know “Mighty potentates and dynasties will lay down their honors within the heavenly city.[18]
            Your church, your government, your Christian Science Movement [Cause], your universe, exist nowhere to you except as your own consciousness.  Then, ask yourself, how do they exist, in what state of preservation and freedom are they?  What are you doing to know that they are eternal?  To quote Mary Baker Eddy,
            To seek or employ other means than those the Master used in demonstrating Life scientifically, is to lose the priceless knowledge of his Principle and practice.  He said, ‘Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.’  Gain a pure Christianity; for that is requisite for healing the sick.  Then you will need no other aid, and will have full faith in his prophesy, ‘And there shall be one fold, and one shepherd;’ but the Word must abide in us, if we would obtain that promise.  We cannot depart from his holy example – we cannot leave Christ for the schools which crucify him, and yet follow him in healing.[19]



[1] S&H 583:12

[2] Mis 258:12-15

[3] S&H 340:23-27

[4] Beasley, The Continuing Spirit, p. 229; [My interpolations.]

[5] Beasley, The Continuing Spirit, pp. 277, 278; Braden, C. S. Today, p. 277; [My interpolation.]

[6] Oakes, Discerning the Rights of Man, p. 29

[7] John 14:2-3; Italics added by me

[8] Paul Revere was a pen name used by anonymous writers beginning in 1943.  The sent out monthly pamphlets to practitioners, teachers, and other interested people in the field.

[9] “Paul Revere,” Continuity of the Spiritual Univ. M.C., Pamphlet 28, p. 11

[10] Braden, Christian Science Today, p. 231

[11] CHRISTIAN SCIENCE After 1910, by Andrew W. Hartsook, p. 89

[12] CHRISTIAN SCIENCE After 1910, by Andrew W. Hartsook, p. 89

[13] [Interpolation as found in Hartsook’s book.]

[14] CHRISTIAN SCIENCE After 1910, by Andrew W. Hartsook, p. 89 and 90; [Other interpolations, beside footnote 13’s interpolation, are mine.]

[15] My 200:1

[16] No 10:7

[17] Mis 80:16-22

[18] S&H 577:22-24

[19] Mis 270:11-23; Italics added by me.