Proof and Theology

An ontology is an explanation of existence—a science of being or reality.

While Christian Science can be considered from several different perspectives, this book focuses primarily on its ontological propositions. I will do my best to touch on the important theological, cultural, and healthcare implications that these propositions will inevitably raise. However, if you are interested in those aspects of Christian Science primarily, there are great books written on those subjects by Stephen Gottschalk and Robert Peel.

Here are my recommendations:

The Emergence of Christian Science in American Religious Life, Stephen Gottschalk, 1974.
Christian Science: Its Encounter with American Culture, Robert Peel, 1958.
Spiritual Healing in a Scientific Age, Robert Peel, 1987.
Health and Medicine in the Christian Science Tradition: Principle, Practice, and Challenge, Robert Peel, 1988.

As I mentioned in the previous chapter, the Christian Science explanation of existence is based on the premise that existence itself is an infinite Mind. This is different from theories that envision the universe as the materialization of thoughts in a dimensional framework, or as some sort of holographic projection of consciousness into space. It means that consciousness is all there is. There is no matter. There is no physical space. There are no physical dimensions.

What results, in part, is a view of existence in which the material universe, including our observation of it, is the experience of a false concept or belief.

For Christian Scientists the key word here is false. It is not a concept included in the infinite Mind. Therefore, it is not a real concept.

For non-Christian Scientists, however, the key word should be concept. The material universe is not materially experienced. It is the experience of a concept.

In considering this worldview, dreams are a helpful analogy. Dreams can seem real and material while we are inside of them, in a manner of speaking. We can feel emotions in dreams. We can have a body in dreams. We can interact with our surroundings in dreams, hear sounds, touch surfaces, solve problems, and even move through time and space. No matter how material or real the dream feels while we are in it, however, it remains a purely mental experience. It is an interaction with specific concepts.

Eddy writes that "Mortal existence is a dream of pain and pleasure in matter, a dream of sin, sickness, and death; and it is like the dream we have in sleep, in which every one recognizes his condition to be wholly a state of mind."*

From the Christian Science perspective, the subjective nightly dream experiences are a microcosm of the objective experience of matter itself.

Just like the sleeping dream operates according to certain internal rules, so does the greater experience of material existence. However, both the personal dream and the general experience of matter can be proved illusory or unreal. Its premises, rules, and consequences can be overcome.

A dream is proved illusory when we wake up from it. We do not linger in the fear of the tiger that chased us in the dream or look for it under our bed. We understand the tiger as the false experience of a concept. We leave the dream behind as an illusion and go on with our day.

From a Christian Science perspective, the entire material universe is also proved illusory and overcome through a similar understanding of it as a concept. This is believed to be in part what the biblical prophet named Jesus did, albeit in an age where the language of science as we know it today had not been developed. The biblical record tells of the prophet overcoming the experience of matter in every circumstance he faced—healing diseases, walking on water, feeding thousands of people from a few pieces of bread and fish, and so on.**

Without further context, I understand it would be a stretch for many to simply accept this record as evidence. However, if the specific accounts recorded are true, they would seem to provide some evidence of an underlying reality beyond material existence.

The biblical record includes the following statements from Jesus as well:

“... believe me for the very works' sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; …"***
“... these signs shall follow them that believe; … if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."****

For Christian Scientists, these may be sayings from an ancient culture and language, but they are nonetheless scientific statements. They propose a basis for testing and proving Jesus' worldview through the duplication of the biblical record in any era.

First, it could be said from the statements above that Jesus sees a cause and effect relationship between thought and experience. If one believes in Jesus—perhaps in modern terms we would say that if one understood Jesus or accepted his view of reality—then the same results as those of Jesus' experience would follow: He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also.

In other passages Jesus refers to belief in "... the gospel of the kingdom of God,"* not referring to the four gospel books to be written decades after his life, but his gospel, or good news that "... the kingdom of God is at hand: …"**

For Jesus, therefore, the ability to overcome material rules and limitations was a present one, and it was linked to belief—a type of mental activity.

Second, it could be said that Jesus points out the way to test belief in his gospel by its outcome in experience: these signs, these results, shall follow them that believe. For Christian Scientists, therefore, Jesus lays out a way to recognize the correct belief or understanding of Jesus' ontology. For example, those who lay hands on the sick, and they recover, believe. They share and understand enough of Jesus' worldview to experience similar results.

In another passage, he is recorded as saying "... by their fruits ye shall know them."***

The context of the biblical narrative provides some support for the notion that theology was a scientific or provable ontological endeavor at the time. For example, when the followers of John the Baptist asked Jesus if he was in fact the Christ or Messiah, if he was the final revelator of truth, he pointed to the results of his ministry as the answer.

“... tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached."* The acceptance of this answer in the passage seems to imply that no further explanation was needed. Jesus' worldview may have been different from John's, and his choice of words may have been different from previous prophets, but the results provided the proof of its merit.

John's followers, therefore, could assume that Jesus was utilizing the same mental laws as those previous prophets, despite the very different culture, language, time period, and set of circumstances, because his results were consistent with theirs.

In modern times we use this kind of reasoning constantly. For example, we assume that if a Chinese pilot is flying a plane today, he is utilizing the same laws of aerodynamics that the Wright brothers used more than a century ago.

Whether the description of these laws is in English or Chinese, in old or modern terms, is irrelevant. All successful human flight operates according to the same rules and proves an understanding of them.

In every recorded circumstance, Jesus' theology was proved successful if the conditions of the theology were met. Some of these conditions included trust and belief. For example, it is recorded that "... he did not many mighty works [in his hometown] because of their unbelief."** Yet little else seemed to be required for the application of the mental laws employed. People from vastly different faiths, languages, and cultures were consistently healed and raised from death by Jesus.

For the pilot we would also expect that certain conditions be met for consistent results, such as favorable weather or a proper wing design. But beyond the specific requirements of aerodynamics, the circumstances, language, or culture of the pilot and passengers are irrelevant to flying. An understanding of the applicable law itself is all that is needed for its immediate use by anyone.

The pilot proves the laws of aerodynamics in the act of flying. For Christian Scientists, Jesus proved his understanding of reality in the act of healing. Perhaps he was doing so in ways that were counterintuitive to many of the witnesses, and even to us today. Nevertheless, he consistently showed his theology to be correct and universally applicable.

From this perspective, the testable and provable nature of these ancient sayings cuts through the problem of subjectivity found in most religions and philosophies. The words used or translated from scripture do not carry as much importance as their healing results. If sound theology has historically resulted in healing, then healing is the proof that a theology has merit, and that it has been correctly understood.

Perhaps more importantly, the thought-based nature of this healing work eliminates the inherent time and resource limitations of matter-based scientific endeavors. Because it is mental, the action requisite for the solution to any problem is available to everyone, and at this very moment.

In her textbook, Eddy writes that "In divine Science, where prayers are mental, all may avail themselves of God as “a very present help in trouble.”* She says that “Christian Science is natural, but not physical. The Science of God and man is no more supernatural than is the science of numbers, though departing from the realm of the physical, as the Science of God, [Mind], must, some may deny its right to the name of Science."**

In Jesus’ preaching and practice, Eddy saw an understanding of existence centered on the infinite Mind which was necessarily different from physical knowledge, but nonetheless scientific—that is, testable and provable. This was an all-encompassing set of mental laws. It was a theology that could be utilized to resolve all the issues of human experience. For Eddy, the consistency of the healing work proved the absolute validity of the perspective.

Eddy thought of Jesus as “... the most scientific man that ever trod the globe."*** She writes that he “... plunged beneath the material surface of things, and found the [mental] cause."**** In Jesus' life and career she claims to have discovered a provable relationship between consciousness and experience, revealing "... all cause and effect as mental, not physical."***** It was a Christian Science—the science behind the theology and healing ministry of Christ Jesus—which proved existence to be an infinite Mind.

In this Science of the Christ, therefore, it is the demonstration of an idea through a healing outcome which is to be considered a scientific or Christian endeavor. Without this cause and effect relationship no experiments, rituals, or repetition of words could be said to be based on reality. Prayer that duplicates the healing work of Jesus and other prophets verifies an accurate understanding of reality as they understood it. It is not a proposition of faith but of reason, discovery, and application in consciousness.

Examples of this type of prayer are readily found throughout the scriptures. In the Old Testament of the Bible there are versions of every miracle Jesus performed, though accomplished by people in vastly different cultures, circumstances, and time periods. They were seen as miracles by those who witnessed them, precisely because they did not see a physical cause for the witnessed results. The witnesses equated matter with reality. But the prophets were working with ideas. They were demonstrating a type of mental activity that was consequential to human experience. They were proving a more accurate understanding of existence.

In the New Testament, Jesus’ students (his disciples and apostles) also learned to pray with results that were consistent with his. Could it be assumed that the same unseen mental laws were in operation there as well? From a Christian Science perspective, it can be.

Jesus' students were not lucky recipients of a magical touch by a mystical super-human. They were not made-up characters from a more primitive and superstitious past. They were learners and practitioners of a purely mental view of existence, who—putting aside embellishments, errors, or misunderstandings by the scribes who wrote and copied their stories—were proving their understanding in their practice.

In the 1800s, after having endured 45 years of physical problems, Mary Baker Eddy felt that she gained an insight about this meaning of Jesus' theology. The discovery healed her instantaneously of injuries sustained in an accident which had been pronounced fatal by those caring for her. Pursuing this insight further in thought she began to develop an understanding of existence as the direct outcome of an all-encompassing and harmonious Mind. She began to equate her being with consciousness itself—the logical action of that infinite Mind—instead of a physical body with a mind in it. To her, life became the mental consequence of God.

More importantly, she found that those who she embraced in her thought while entertaining this newfound perspective were being healed as well, without material remedies or methods. She had discovered a mental law of healing.

Eddy went on to develop a body of systematic healing works spanning more than four decades, consistent with the works of Jesus, of his disciples and apostles, and of the Old Testament Jewish prophets.

For those interested in the record of her practice, here are my recommendations:

Mary Baker Eddy: The Years of Trial, Robert Peel, 1971.
Mary Baker Eddy: Christian Healer, Yvonne Cache von Fettweis and Robert Townsend Warneck, 1998.

“You can prove for yourself, dear reader," she writes, "the Science of healing, and so ascertain if the author has given you the correct interpretation of Scripture."* For me, this is reminiscent of Jesus’ message to his disciples and John the Baptist, when he implied that they could discern for themselves if he was the Messiah.

They would prove whether or not his theology, his ontology, his understanding of existence, was correct. Those who believed his gospel would do the works that he did.

Belief without proof had been trivial from the beginning. Though our modern conception of it did not yet exist, Jesus' theology was always intended to be a science.

For Eddy, to plunge beneath the material surface of things, as Jesus did, means to understand existence from the perspective of the infinite Mind. It means to be conscious only of that which is real.

This consciousness of reality may be experienced as a miracle to those witnessing its outcome. However, from a Christian Science perspective there is no miracle involved. Eddy explains that, "The physical healing of Christian Science results now, as in Jesus' time, from the operation of divine [Mind], before which sin and disease lose their reality in human consciousness and disappear as naturally and as necessarily as darkness gives place to light … Now, as then, these mighty works are not supernatural, but supremely natural."*

The mighty works are the application in thought of reason and discovery, through which Mind's infinitude is consciously seen. In Eddy's words, Mind's infinitude "... is demonstrated by healing the sick and thus proved absolute and divine."**

Most theological concepts in scripture do not align with the human experience and perspective. Therefore, if the reported results in scriptural stories were not possible, then, in my view, very little meaning could be attributed to them, regardless of any beauty or moral value of the story. As the apostle Paul writes in a letter to the Corinthians, "... if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain."*

Scholarly attempts to explore the biblical accounts of healing usually assume the impossibility of the reported results, or at least the impossibility of properly assessing them, and with good reasons. This puts them in a position, however, of attempting the dissection of a theology as separate from its related outcome.

For centuries this may have been the best we could do, given our distance in time from the events recorded. However, we may now be in an age where a similar record of mental healing is being produced.

Today, there are demonstrations of scientific mental healing on a daily basis—ranging from healings of broken bones to healings of fatal conditions, often medically diagnosed. These healings are the results experienced by those who practice the mental science discovered by Eddy in the 1800s. Its practice may very well be counterintuitive to human perspectives, but according to the record, this science can be learned, practiced, and proved over a lifetime.

A partial but significant portion of this record has been recorded, verified, and published in the Christian Science periodicals for more than a century. For those interested in the research, these periodicals are available to the public physically in Christian Science Reading Rooms worldwide, or digitally in the online archives of the Christian Science Publishing Society.**

In my view, this record poses a direct and substantial challenge to all wholly or partially material perspectives of the universe. I believe that this is a record which must be reconciled, at some point, with every field of scientific and theological study.

If taken for what it claims to be—verified accounts of mental healing—the relationship between thought and experience in the accounts is difficult to ignore. If accepted as evidence, the need would remain today, as in biblical times, for the understanding and practice of this mental science in meeting the challenges of daily experience.

It is available to you and me for proving at this very moment.

Consciousness, after all, may not be a mere oddity in the experiments of quantum theory, or an abstract and undefinable aspect of human experience. It may in fact be the tangible and discoverable mental universe of which reality consists.

The counsel of the apostle John was to try the spirits. In modern terms, we would say to test or prove each thought and theory. “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world."

This counsel brings us back to the first BIG question:

Does the ontology of Christian Science offer a meaningful and complete explanation of consciousness?

Christian Science proposes a study, practice, and demonstration of scientific mental action. It suggests that this has been the mission and work, throughout history, of every prophet—every mental practitioner in the lineage of the Messianic theology; it argues that this mission demonstrates the omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience of God, the infinite Mind; and, if its record is to be accepted, it explains and improves the human experience in the demonstration of its validity.

Therefore, those who practice Christian Science see it as a meaningful and complete explanation of consciousness. They see it as the provable science of Mind.

From this point forward in the book, let us assume this record is factual to explore its mechanics and implications.

Now that we have a basis for considering Eddy's discovery as scientific, I will spend the next few chapters giving my perspective on some of the points I found hardest to understand when I began taking her discovery seriously. I will explore some of the specific rules of the belief in matter and its experience. I will illustrate how, if based on something as changeable and fluid as thought, this experience can seem so solid and objective.

But first, what is the insight Eddy gained about Jesus' theology?

ON CONSCIOUSNESS and the Christian Science view of existence

Proof and Theology