CSD - a symbol of the past,
or a symbol for the future?
...relating to the advance of human
In the context
of relating to the past, the symbol CSB represents in its simplest form a certification for an advanced
educational achievement in the domain of Christian Science healing.
The same symbol can also be understood in a much larger context, in
its relationship to the development of science and discoveries of
universal truth. In the latter context, where it relates
the scientific and spiritual development of an individual, an
institution, or the development of science itself at its leading edge,
even in the context of the self-development of humanity, another
symbol, the symbol CSD comes to light as representing one of the most profound qualities
of man that defines us as cognizant beings.
In this higher
context the symbol CSC has
been chosen as a focal point for web page, especially since it has been
specifically indented by its author to pertain to this higher context in a way that empowers the freedom
self-development as no other symbol known to me does.
Its background relating to the
As said before,
in its simplest form it represents a certification for formal education in Christian Science.
This is obtained in
the Massachusetts Metaphysical College, established in 1881 by Mary Baker Eddy
as its President. Mary Baker Eddy had personally taught in this college until
1889, at which date the college was closed. It remained closed until
when she reopened it as an auxiliary to her church. Students taught in this college, receive the
certification C.S.B., which corresponds to a Bachelor decree. A second
degree, C.S.D., is awarded to those who practice Christian Science for
three years after receiving the first degree. This designation corresponds to a
Doctor's degree. (See. My p.244) In practice, Mary Baker Eddy bestowed
the degree C.S.D. to her own students, while the college today bestows
the degree C.S.B. upon its students.
of such degrees are authorized to attach the awarded certification
symbols as a professional initial to their name.
Relating to the
symbols take on a new meaning. Mary Baker Eddy stipulated in the
Manual of her church that
if the President of the Massachusetts Metaphysical College should
resign over her own signature, or vacate her office, a successor
should be appointed to fill that vacancy. None of that has happened. She
never resigned, nor vacated her office throughout her lifetime. Thus she remains in perpetuity
the President of the Massachusetts Metaphysical College (see Manual
From a purely administrative
standpoint this makes no
sense whatsoever. Nevertheless, Mary Baker Eddy was not likely thinking in such
simple terms, because she links that development to a much deeper
challenge to which her continued presidency of college, which she
symbolically retained in perpetuity, is of vital significance.
challenge is presented by her in the appendix to the Church Manual
where she stipulates that a person's application for membership may be
countersigned by someone who has "taken a degree at the Massachusetts Metaphysical
College." She didn't say, "received a degree."
p.114, 116, and 118)
might argue that this phrasing of, having "taken a degree," is but a
figure of speech. One might argue that it means the same as having
received a degree. That argument could be accepted, were it not for the well known fact
that Mary Baker Eddy was consistently, extremely careful in choosing
her wording, sometimes pondering over a specific phrasing for weeks.
In other words, the phrasing that she has chosen didn't likely
represent just a figure of speech,
but was a carefully chosen phrasing designed for a specific purpose to
uplift the future of humanity. This was her stated goal in everything
she did, therefore the purpose behind her unique phasing deserves to be explored.
So, let's begin with what we have presented to us.
We have two anomalies here. We have a President who no
longer exists in person, but exists symbolically in perpetuity, which
gives the institution itself a symbolic significance. And we have a
revolutionary concept of authorization presented, namely a person's
It has been taken for granted, for far too long,
a person's accomplishments must always be authorized by another person before
they can be accepted as valid. But what does this say about ones honesty with
oneself and with the world? And what does this say about
Mary Baker Eddy's perception of man? Indeed, what does this say about
one's individual responsibility to oneself, in terms of what is being
In Christian Science man is
understood as the reflected image of God. Who would presume to
authorize God? It appears that the whole concept of 'giving'
authorization is something that pertains only to the lower levels of
perception, but belongs not into the
scientific domain where one deals with universal truth and fundamental
principles at the edge of infinite self-development. The concept of
self-authorization clearly fall into this higher
domain. Indeed, this concept is absolutely required for one's correct
self-identification in divine Science as the "son of God."
This consideration brings into focus the second
anomaly, the President who no longer exists in person. It is a
symbolic presidency that she has established thereby, which makes the
in this higher sense, likewise a symbolic institution. In this context
the College stands as a symbol for the human quest in discovering
fundamental principles, including the principles of divine Science.
It has to be that way, because the quest for scientific understanding and
discoveries of principle, that her own efforts symbolized, is boundless without perceivable limits. A finite
structure that embraces the authorization of one person by another, is
invalid in the infinite realm of evermore
advanced discovery and self-development. Indeed it comes to light as a hindrance at
those higher levels.
Do I hear and protests yet?
Be honest! You
want to protest here, and say to me: you can't say these things. That's against the rules, our rules!
Let me assure you, your are not alone in this. People are tempted to argue that Mary Baker Eddy clearly stated that the certification C.S.B.
is given to those who complete a course of instruction in the
Massachusetts Metaphysical College. Period!
Indeed, she did
state that. But she did not state that this is the only avenue to obtain
the said degree. She hinted at the existence of al least one other
avenue, that is to 'take' it, to actively claim it on the strength of
one's own self-authorization in an honest acknowledgement of the
appropriate achievement. Indeed, such a provision has never been made before Mary Baker
Eddy's time. It was a pioneering breakthrough that poses to the world
a unique Christian Science challenge.
might say that Mary Baker Eddy was stupid in
making that suggestion, that such a process would create chaos. I would
answer them, NO! I would suggest that the opposite is true.
What Mary Baker
Eddy is suggesting is of enormous social significance. The greatest
significance of what she is suggesting lies actually beyond the open
door of self-authorization, beyond ones honesty with oneself and the
world. The greatest significance of her breakthrough suggestion lies
in its demand upon society, that it take decisive steps to raise its
democratic platform to a higher level of self-awareness and awareness
of the truth. It is clearly society's own task to uplift its
perception of all the fundamental principles relating to its
existence, and the value of them, so that society becomes
self-authorized on the authority of those principles and the
acknowledged value of them.
It is society's
task to raise itself to such a level of awareness of the universal truth that
its actions, institutions, and governments, will be forever
subservient to those principles, even to society's highest perception of
them. No one can authorize society in this process of unfolding at the
leading edge, which is a process of self-development and
self-ennoblement. Without authorization, society will strife to reach
as high as it can, without imposing limits.
instead of fulfilling that responsibility towards itself, society is
inclined to transfer its responsibility to an elite who then
authorizes the legitimacy of society's ideals and precepts, which, in
this case, become cleverly imposed upon it by the elite authorities.
In this kind of process society's freedom becomes lost, and with it its impetus for
There is a
great danger inherent in the process of seeking authorization from
others, or accepting imposed authorization. This danger is best
illustrated by the 1998 case of the collapse of the LTCM (Long Time
Capital Management) hedge fund. The LTCM company and its apparatus
were the creation of two of the most leading experts with the
highest possible authorization and certification. They were authorized
by the elite of the world that bestowed upon both of them the Nobel
Price in economics. One can't get a more authoritative
authorization than that.
A short time
later LTCM went down in a spectacular bankruptcy collapse that nearly
took the entire world-financial system down with it. Countless
investors lost everything they had on the
basis of their misplaced trust, who had blindly trusted the certification that
had authorized the financial experts as geniuses.
In real terms
the loosing investors lost out because of their own lack of
self-development towards a competent knowledge of the process they
invested in. This natural demand for self-competence always
falls by the wayside in the comforts of relying on authorization.
When Mary Baker
Eddy suggested to a membership applicant that the application form could be
countersigned by a person who has 'taken' a degree in the
Massachusetts Metaphysical College, did Mary Baker Eddy not thereby
put the onus directly on the applicant with the demand to judge
whether the prospective counter signer really has taken that step? That's an
important responsibility she has thereby established.
scientific sense it shouldn't matter to the applicant at all what the
prospective counter signer claims about himself. The
only question that should be considered, is that pertaining to the
person's accomplishments. This is the all important
question. The question must be asked, and be answered, by the applicant
alone. The question must be answered
on the strength of the subservience of the person in question, to the
fundamental principles that are symbolically represented by the degree of
For this reason,
I will not stand up publicly to state whether I have, or have not,
taken a degree. What I perceive about myself is my own business, and
one else's. Nor would I benefit society by announcing any such thing. In fact I
would take away the responsibility of another to make that
determination about myself.
I am certain,
however, that in future ages, what appears to be an impossible recognition
today, will be
recognized as possible, even in the field of Christian Scientists, provided that the Christian Science church
organization continues to exist that long. The organization appears to
be in a process of collapsing which ensues a tragic loss to society.
The collapse a natural consequence for any structure in which no genuine advanced development
is taking place, nor has been taken place for many decades.
This brings me
to another point, why a person's acceptance of an external authority can be
detrimental. Let's take the case of the certification C.S.B. itself.
The certification C.S.B. can be obtained by submitting oneself to a course of instruction
in said college. One therefore trusts that the course of instruction
lives up to its billing. But what happens if it doesn't? What happens if
there are a lot of big holes in what the
teacher knows about the subject that is being taught? What then?
Indeed, most of
the present time Christian Science teachers in the field, if not all
of them, know relatively little about
their subject for the simple fact that one of Mary Baker Eddy's major
achievements has been rendered unauthorized knowledge, so much so so that many
people go out of their way not to know any more abut it. Most people tend
to restrict themselves to only that which they have been taught by their teacher, which is a
little less than what their teacher had been taught, and so forth,
through the generations. Without an active ongoing scientific and
spiritual development that would be uplifting the field of Christian Science, there
is less being taught today than had been taught a hundred years ago, and
that which is still remaining will tend to trail out to zero as time goes
on. By this build in entropy the most precious becomes lost.
was to prevent this entropy, that Mary Baker Eddy took those
pioneering steps in opening the door to self-authorized scientific and
spiritual development. The small minded process that degenerates into
ignorance looses its build in entropy only when the background is fresh with
the vigorous, self-authorized, continuously advancing,
self-development of society.
this prevailing mental entropy exists not only in the area where one's submission
to an external authority is detrimental. In fact this is the least
dangerous effect of it. The great danger to society as a whole lies in
its habit to allow its precepts and perceptions to be shaped by
'authorized' agencies that intentionally cause regression. This effect
results from the way society views its news
media. People accept what they read as a kind of 'authorized' fact.
They say, if it is printed in the papers it must be true. They say I
have heard this and that on the internet, or on TV, or on whatever;
therefore it must be factual, since the authorities said it to be so. People who treat themselves in this manner accept an implicit authorization for whatever,
by this process, is imposed on them, which then shapes their lives accordingly.
reality, in contrast, is often more to the point that the 'authorized'
facts are all too often blatantly concocted lies created for the manipulation
of public consciousness, a kind of Roman circus designed to hide the
rotten state of the empire's affairs, or as the case may be, to whip
up hatred against a chosen enemy, or whoever person or state lends himself to best
fit that role.
The outcome of
all that, for society, is extremely dangerous. That's how society's
for authorization must be regarded.
11, 2001, tragedy, for example, is an interesting case of that kind. The
American economist, statesman, and many times candidate for the U.S.
Presidency has stated immediately as the tragedy happened that the
attack on the USA was a coup d'etat against the U.S. government, and
that it could only be orchestrated from within high level areas of the
intelligence, security, and or military services. He even predicted,
right there and then, that Bin Laden would be blamed for the attack.
Indeed, this happened eight hours later, just as he had forecast. Soon
thereafter the war against
Afghanistan was launched. The public evidently needed something to sink its
teeth in. Still, LaRouche warned against this approach, as a reaction
that is not founded on the truth.
Lyndon LaRouche was right, as knowledgeable people tend to agree, what
effect will the truth have on society, even though it may take years for the
truth to come out?
Does the rushing into violent reaction, which occurred, mean that society didn't want to hear the
truth, that it wanted something simple, that it wanted
an authorized enemy figure, whether there was any truth behind it or
not? That is often the way the public is treated when it makes itself
dependent on external authorization, instead of on its own cognition,
and the fruit of its self-development with a growing appreciation of principles, and an
elevating perception of them.
in history tend to be repeated whenever society allows itself to be governed
by closed minded reactions and authorized perceptions. These trends
invariably generate a closed minded ignorance that is hard for a
person to break out of. The war drums may sound again and again
before an unaided transition occurs. The long promoted "clash of civilizations war"
that is presently being prepared for may well be under way long before an effective opposition will be
launched. This puts society into a highly dangerous situation. Mary Baker
Eddy's revolutionary open door policy to self-authorized perception may be society's only
way out of this world destroying trap.
Society has no
hope for long term survival in an atmosphere of imposed
authorization, especially not in a nuclear
armed world. Society simply cannot afford to allow every instance of its
existence to be outlined and authorized by external agencies who
follow their own agenda. Society's security literally depends on its becoming
its own leader. There is a need to increase the quality of its living
in a spiritual and scientific sense.
seeking authorization is a qualitatively low level pursuit that takes
place at the lowest levels. Real
security, however, can only be found at the highest levels of
perception and self-awareness, which reflects ones self-government by the principles
one discovers at that higher level, principles that one understands at this level,
that one can gladly acknowledge, uphold, and apply.
Has the pursuit of elevating our
perception of principles any real and essential practical value?
I would say
that it has. Let me pose a question. How does one unite two opposite
forces in society, as for instance the Abortionists, and the
Anti-abortionists? How does one do that?
Some say it
can't be done. I say, this is possible. It is possible to do that by
going into ones basement of long forgotten ideals and search for the
fundamental principles by which humanity is defined - principles of
the type that we all represent as human beings. We can dig them up,
bring them out of the basement into our living rooms and elevate them
in our consciousness to something of great value - as being of a
greater value than even ourselves. Then we engage in a dialog with one
another to explore which of these specific principles we can all rally behind.
This first step brings us together. We can use this as a foundation to build
on. After that we challenge each other to raise the bar of our perceptions
of the principles that we cannot see eye to eye on, and to thereby raise
each other up to a higher level of humanity in term of what it means
to live as a human being. On this platform the differences can be
We are all human beings. Our humanity is what unites us. A
natural unity can be found in the fundamental principles of human
existence, human development, human needs and human strengths. Our
differences can be bridged on this platform and on no other. A fight
between authoritative impositions of stereotyped viewpoints will never
achieve anything. We have to step away from what is defined as
authorized thinking, and authorize ourselves to search for the truth
and to dig deep to find it. This is the ecumenical principle by which
the clash of civilizations can be avoided that is about to be
unleashed. It is totally possible to turn the situation around, to
turn the proposed clash of civilizations into a cooperative unity
there has to be a willingness to give up the wielding of
authority that would cause us to impose our petty perceptions onto
others. Every form of authority oriented thinking is a trap. One is easily caught
in it, as I personally experienced.
in North Vancouver made a number of profound discoveries that brought to
light a vast organized structure for scientific and spiritual
development that Mary Baker Eddy evidently had build all of her works
on, which she had outlined in numerous significant details. The
discoveries brought to light many of these details.
details were centered on the fact that every one of Mary Baker Eddy's
major works were divided into 16 parts, or multiples of 16 parts. This
feature allows them to be brought into context with the Biblical city
four square that is correlative to a
four-square matrix structure containing
sixteen elements. Altogether, Mary Baker Eddy presented nine major
structures made up of 16 parts, or multiples thereof, such as the
glossary of the textbook that contains 144 definitions, or 9 times
16 of them. The vast range of interrelationship presented a certain challenge, to
research what significance Mary Baker Eddy may have found in these
interrelated arrangements, and to discover how they were
development involves a higher quality of perception. If it raises the
standard of truth, the resulting quality environment makes its own
demands on the consciousness of others to uplift the whole scene. No
one is benefited by just going along to get along, as Lyndon LaRouche
often points out. Such a subjection is synonymous to sacrificing valid
principles at the altar of authorization, or refused authorization. Incalculable
damage to society has resulted from this "going along to get
along," by which people surrender invaluable principles. Often,
the issues are small, but they can also be enormously huge.
consider the case of humanity as a
whole, which has become divided into an imperial camp that openly aims for
world-domination, and a republican camp with ideals for humanist
development and a world made up of perfectly sovereign nation states
in a community of shared principles. The imperial camp imposes and
defends its position by the authority of its power, and by the
authority of its utopian philosophers which it vigorously
promotes. The camp of the republican ideals defends its position on
the strength of humanity's history and the value of fundamental
principles, natural principles, principles which support and develop
a nation and civilization, but all too often, for the sake of money,
power, prestige, or sometimes even sheer convenience, the ideals fall
be the wayside.
One could say
that such a reaction could be deemed a form of self-authorization,
too. This would be tragic, indeed. Mary Baker Eddy solves this problem
by linking ones self-authorization with the platform of the Massachusetts
Metaphysical College, symbolically. In other words, only
qualitative improvements in thinking are valid for self-authorization.
With this linkage she has set up a constitutional platform for
self-authorization, a constitution for ones motives and acts. The
world would be a dramatically saver and richer place if this platform
It may turn out
that Mary Baker Eddy's greatest breakthrough for humanity may not have
discovery of a scientific method for Christ healing in our age, nor
the revolutionary church organization that she founded, and maybe not
even be her remarkably revolutionary structure for discovery and
scientific and spiritual development that all her works were evidently
founded on. It may turn out to be that Mary Baker Eddy's greatest
breakthrough for humanity comes to light in that insignificant seeming, daring
concept that shift humanity away from subjecting itself to authorized
thinking and authorized reactions, towards the self-authorization of an
individual on the strength of understood and acknowledged fundamental principles.
That is what is means to be the son of God, as Christ Jesus
identified man. Humanity's freedom lies in that court, if not its
entire existence in a nuclear armed world. And, of course, that
includes all of us.
The role of the Christian Science
Monitor is revolutionary.
Science Monitor is by design one of the unique newspaper in the
world. It was created by the most scientifically advanced religious
leader of the 19th and 20th Century, Mary Baker Eddy. Surprisingly, the
not set up by her as a religious newspaper or to serve as an organ of her
church. This is to say, it was not designed to wrap itself around narrowly
confined single-focus issues pertaining to an institutional religion and
its belief structure. It may well be the only newspaper created by a
religious organization that was not created to be religious by intent,
even though it is by its very name Christian in nature.
becomes resolved if one realizes that this newspaper's purpose,
function, and effect was by design located in the domain of universal
truth, universal fundamental principles, universal scientific
development, and even universal spiritual development. It wasn't indented
to preach divine Science, much less Christian Science, but to uplift
the thinking of humanity to such levels of self-awareness, and an
awareness of universal principles, that society becomes thereby equipped
live divine Science, to embody the understood and acknowledged
principles of it in its daily living.
The goal of the
Christian Science Monitor was not on such a low level as to raise
specific single-issue Christian Science questions, but to uplift
humanity to embrace the simultaneity of eternity, as Lyndon LaRouche
expressed this idea in many of his writings - that is, to cause people
to leave their sensual, mortal life in the closet, so to speak, and
step out of that closet as an immortal being by virtue of having been
endowed with the capacity to enrich and uplift the whole of humanity
in an enduring fashion for the benefit of the world, and the world of
their children and of future generations. In this enduring, elevating
impact of their actions on humanity, is the immortality of the human
being expressed on this earth.
Within the design
parameters of the Christian Science Monitor, Mary Baker Eddy has put on the table
a demand on society to understand and acknowledge what the real dimension of
Christianity is, which is not sectarian in nature, but is spiritual
in nature, located in the universal role of the human being as the
expressed image of God. Here man comes to light as a cognizant being with the capacity to
create, to discover, to understand, and to act on a scientific spiritual
platform in such a manner as to ennoble and enrich itself, its
environment, it's world, even its universe.
Such a sweeping
is rarely heard, but we have heard it implicitly from Mary Baker
Eddy, "to bless all mankind and to injure no one," which is
the official motto of the Christian Science Monitor. It should be
realized that the Christian Science Monitor is not
"authorized" by the church, but is self-authorized in every
Universal development and self-authorization go hand
in hand. The Monitor could not fulfill its mission on any other
platform, or should I say on any lesser platform? A thorough
understanding of the significance of Mary Baker Eddy's structure for
discovery and scientific and spiritual development, as well as a
working knowledge of it by its staff, appears to be essential for the
Monitor to fulfill its assigned leadership role. One doesn't see this
happening. The consequence is that the Monitor has taken on the role of being just another inconsequential newspaper on the
block, a better one perhaps, than most, but it doesn't fulfill its unique
scientific and spiritual leadership role, its purpose for being, a
role that educates people, that turns society into leaders themselves,
that urges them on scientifically and spiritually to live at the
leading edge of perception, a role that most other newspaper don't fulfill.
qualitative recession that we see happening in society has been unavoidable as a
consequence of the entropy that takes hold when the development thrust
isn't there. So, who is left, pushing the leading edge forward? The
entropy that has gripped the Monitor, as society as a whole, will necessarily continue
until the Monitor begins to fulfill its full mission according to what is evidently
its design platform: to represent the value and the power of universal
truth, fundamental truth, truth that alters the world, truth that
heals the nations, truth that unites us all on a higher platform than
any petty single issue focus allows, truth that ends wars, truth that
elevates civilization and ennobles the image of man. That's a tall
order, but the Monitor was correspondingly designed to stand tall.
Only, why then
did Mary Baker Eddy call her newspaper, to which she assigned such a universal mission,
the name, Christian Science Monitor, as if it were an authorized organ of
the Christian Science church? The reason, obviously, lies in the
nature of what the Monitor represents. The name Science is essential, because
the operation of science is inherently a spiritual process, and that
makes it fundamentally a Christian process as well. Christianity is the very
expression of the historically highest form of scientific, spiritual
self-development, exemplified by the Christ, the highest idea of God.
Thus, the phrase Christian Science, being attached to the Monitor, represents not
so much a trademark,
in this context, but a very truthful functional descriptor of its
of science is a spiritual process of discovery by the cognizant
qualities of the human mind, discoveries of eternal principles,
universal principles, laws of truth, verifiable, understandable
complex phenomena that can be reduced to a fundamental level of understanding
to be applied to uplift humanity and the world. That's a spiritual
process, a process that produces recognitions, and also physical elements
by manifestation, that never existed before prior to their inception by a human being.
The opposite is
the Gnostic belief system. It is a system that is not focused on truth but is focused
on sensual impulses, mystic notions, violent entertainment, fantasies of magic, miracle
theologies, rather than verifiable discoveries based on the resolution
of paradoxes, rigorous investigation, and practical proof in term of
real power, the power of an idea to transform the universe and uplift
and heal human lives.
people to sleep as human beings, and then rears itself up as an
"authorized" ideology. It has to promote itself that way,
because there exists no possibility that its fancy delusions can be
supported by intelligent, scientific discoveries, reasoned deduction,
or the resolution of paradoxes.
The Gnostic features are strongly predominant in
today's age. Our corrupted mass media is by design a sensual
entertainment enterprise. It has nothing to do with developing an
innate understanding of universal truth in its context to local or
global issues. It actually fulfills two functions. It offers sensual
entertainment that puts people spiritually to sleep so that its its impositions
are recognized as "authorized" truth. The
worst garbage is put out that way, and people believe it and make it
their opinion, simply because they read it in a newspaper or in a
widely promoted book, or hear about it on a respected TV program. Trash is always promoted that way, as
"authorized" material, because it cannot be accepted as
truth by its own merits based on fundamental principles. Gnosticism
will not allow self-authorized perceptions of truth to stand, based on
scientific and spiritual development. That would destroy its
It is the
distinction between the Gnostic, authorized processes of thinking, and
cognizant thought processes based on self-authorized discoveries of
universal principles by scientific and spiritual development, that
sets apart the mission of the Christian Science Monitor in respect to other papers,
according to its
design. This is also the distinction that Mary Baker Eddy created by
setting up the C.S.D. degree as obtainable on a self-authorized
Still, there is
one more important element involved. Mary Baker Eddy put the
responsibility on the applicant for membership to determine if the
potential counter signer has made the grade, has indeed 'taken' the
degree. Christian Science, as indeed any other since, is put forth in
countless different forms with a vast array of claims attached to
these various forms. Thus it becomes the 'applicant's' responsibility
to determine whether or not the claimant have truly made the grade, so
that their products are true scientific achievements and are not injurious.
This evaluation, looking for a foundation in truth becomes evermore
paramount in our modern days of proliferating opinions and so-called
scientific claims; and is the only protection an individual ultimately
The key to civilization
history of civilization forms a long chain that connects us with the
forces that have shaped our cultures beginning in those distant ages
dating back to several millennia B.C.. Those are the cultures that developed
in Africa, Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, and later in Greece in
cooperation with Egyptian culture. The numerous religions and
supposedly separate cultures that are presently paraded before minds
of humanity in the "clash of civilization" war drive are in
fact rooted in a common heritage that is variously located in these
cultures. Divisions are artificially created by focusing on the
differences in individuality, as though these differences were
fundamental and absolute, and were qualitative differences, the kind
that Adolf Hitler authorized ideologically for the purpose of
destroying the Jewish population.
In an absolute
sense, the different religions of the world do not represent
absolutely divergent ideologies, as for instance the world's imperial
ideologies are, like those of the present time financial oligarchy, in
contrast to the republican ideology of sovereign nation states devoted
to the general welfare of its population. Here, the differences are
indeed fundamental and absolute, and there has been an clash in
progress between these two ideologies for as long as they existed by
virtue of their fundamentally opposite natures and ideals. The
imperial and the republican systems can no more coexist than can light
and darkness coexist. But it is certainly possible for Christianity,
Islam, and Judaism, for instance, to coexist in a mutually enriching
fashion as we find this happening in countless examples all over the
world, as for example in Canada. The overriding factor under which we
unite in our diversity is the standard of universal truth that unites
us all as human beings with common hopes, fears, desires, and
unity that has resulted all over the world wherever cross-cultural
unity developed, did not result from any specific form of
institutional authorization. To the contrary, it resulted often
contrary to authorized beliefs. It resulted from the
self-authorization of courageous individuals who simply began to deal
with one another as human beings.
process took place in the 17th Century that led to the Treaty of
Westphalia in 1648, when after 80 years of war the nations of Europe
began to look at one another as human beings with human qualities,
hopes, fears, desires, and aspirations. No one authorized that change
in perception that uplifted the whole scene. In fact it was contrary
to every ideology that had ruled in those days. The process simply
started with the work of a few self-authorized pioneers who dared to
take a stand for universal truth and fundamental principles. That
changed all of Europe. The wars ended. The imperial ideologies were
banished. And it all happened by the self-authorized fight of a few
pioneers taking a stand for truth and for principle in a daring
honesty with themselves according to their cognition.
Self-authorization and cognition go hand in hand.
The Peace of
Westphalia was maintained until the imperial ideology reasserted
itself in Europe.
spirit of the early 17th Century that powered the self-development of
European society, was also brought to the American shores where it
took root and eventually led to the American Declaration of
Independence. The U.S.A. would never have been formed without the
self-authorized actions of the early pioneers.
In an absolute
sense, true self-authorization does not exist exactly in the form
stated above, because those pioneer's actions were authorized by
something, namely their human cognition, their growing awareness of
universal truth and principles, to which they responded. The responded
to God, which Mary Baker Eddy defined as Truth, the root of one's
self-identification. Man's self-identification, and
self-authorization, are therefore interlinked in this fashion, and
human survival is to a large degree interlinked with it.
The key to human survival.
that led to the Peace of Westphalia are very much needed today. The
world is in the end phase of being set up for a world-engulfing
"clash of civilizations" war. The process is driven by a
powerful imperial apparatus of the financial oligarchy that owns and controls
most governments and institutions, including elected officials, their
advisors, and of course the high level echelons of the military, intelligence,
and security services. The "clash of civilizations" policy,
therefore, must not be seen as a self-authorized creation of some deranged
individual, but should be seen as an authorized construct created
within the organized context of an oligarchy committed to the building
of a politically utopian world-empire on a foundation of fascist
brutality and military might. The September 11 tragedy, and the
ongoing tragedy in the Middle East, is seen in this context by leading
political figures in the world, such as Lyndon LaRouche, and van
Buelow in Germany.
"clash of civilizations" war drive remains unopposed, it
will likely succeed. Indeed, there exists a great danger that it will
succeed since the scientific and spiritual self-development of
humanity has been ground to a halt in the shadow of sensual
entertainment and the efficient control of public perception via the
news and entertainment media where the truth is, whatever it is
authorized to be.
that Mary Baker Eddy has so clearly set up between an authorized
identity, and a self-authorized identity, has become of critical
importance in today's world. It literally has become a life and death
issue for society. This issue is especially critical since the
oligarchy's goal, for its war drive, evidently reflects its long
standing commitment to reduce the world population to below the one
billion mark from its present level, which is easily accomplished in a
nuclear armed world.
The key to
survival is evidently located within the distinction that Mary Baker
Eddy has established between authorized existence or self-authorized
existence as related to the designation CSD. Herein lies the key for
establishing and safeguarding the multicultural universe of a world of
sovereign nations and people bound in community of common principles
and universal truth. Towards this realization Mary Baker Eddy's
breakthrough concepts are of great value, especially her outlined
structure for discovery and scientific and spiritual development. If
society's very existence rests squarely on an advanced awareness of
universal truths and universal principles, Mary Baker Eddy's provision
for the advance of scientific and spiritual development must be
regarded as of incomparable value.
suggests that Mary Baker Eddy was thinking along this line, because
her outlined structure has a broad and universal focus. The structure
is fundamentally a 16 element matrix that is identified by four
horizontal domains, or cardinal
points, related to: the Word, Christ, Christianity, and Christian Science,
which she identified as:
"first, the Word of Life, Truth, and Love; second, the
Christ, the spiritual idea of God; third, Christianity, which is the
outcome of the divine Principle of the Christ-idea in Christian
history; fourth, Christian Science, which to-day and forever
interprets this great example and the great Exemplar."
domains with a universal significance within the dimension of
structure is identified by four ascending domains of development, or
rivers of development, which are related similarly to the Word,
Christ, Christianity, and divine Science. These development domains
are well described by Mary Baker Eddy's Glossary
definition of the four rivers from Genesis:
Pison (river). The love of the good and beautiful,
and their immortality.
Gihon (river). The rights of woman acknowledged
morally, civilly, and socially.
Hiddekel (river). Divine Science understood and
Euphrates (river). Divine Science encompassing the
universe and man; the true idea of God; a type of the glory which is
to come; metaphysics taking the place of physics; the reign of
righteousness. The atmosphere of human belief before it accepts sin,
sickness, or death; a state of mortal thought, the only error of which
is limitation; finity; the opposite of infinity.
These are all
universal concepts that are of fundamental significance for human
development when their scientific signification becomes realized in
the context of the vast array of other structures and definitions that
all relate to this basic structure.
My point is
that none of these concepts and their development pertain to anything
that can be authorized by another. The exploration of their meaning,
their interrelationships, and their application to human existence is
too vast to be authorized by anyone. Working with this structure
becomes a self-authorized scientific exploration of elements of truth
and fundamental principle. The structure provides nothing more than a
framework for rigorous scientific discipline in exploration.
Baker Eddy's concept of self-authorization is currently not recognized
to be valid, it is not surprising that her structure for scientific
and spiritual development is not recognized (or authorized) to exist.
Of course, none of these irritants are a real hindrance, for who can
logically claim the right to authorize what must be the shape of an
infinite development at the leading edge. Only ones own honesty with
the leading realizations of ones own cognition can do that. In full
acknowledgement of this essential process Mary Baker Eddy was able to
write in the preface
of her greatest work, at the height of a momentous achievement: "To-day,
though rejoicing in some progress, she still finds herself a willing
disciple at the heavenly gate, waiting for the Mind of Christ."
What I hear her
say to us, is that she did not set herself up as the supreme
authority, but as a pioneer. I hear her say to us all: I
am not looking for followers whom I have to
pull up behind me. I want to educate society to become leaders unto
themselves, who will surpass me...
She said up a
standard that may be hard to reach, much less to surpass, but in
opening the door to individual self-authorization on the basis of the
universal truth and universal principles that she has established, she
demands society go forward. She demands society to go forward just as
she herself had surged ahead on the platform that the leading pioneers
of humanity have established before her as a part of the larger
cultural heritage of humanity. In this context she is giving an
applicant for membership with her church a choice.
One option of
this choice is to be a follower. One can seek out an authorized,
certified authority as ones mentor and follow that leadership and get
that mentor to sign ones application form.
option of this choice is to become a leader oneself. In other words,
one can seek out a mentor who embodies the highest qualities of
leadership and follow that example, and get that mentor to sign ones
is, how do you choose? There is a huge difference between the two
options which affects the welfare of society as a whole. Currently
society does not seek to be in a leadership role, even unto itself.
Few people realize what this means.
elections, for instance, people look for candidates who think as they
think. If you don't want to pay taxes, you look for a candidate who
promises that you won't have to pay taxes. Eventually that man get
elected, who then fulfills his promise and thereby, promptly destroys
the economy that your existence depends on.
In such a case,
you have not been looking for a leader at all. You have been looking
for a follower that matches your own low level standard of economic
theory. Instead, you should have been looking for a leader who
inspires you to uplift yourself by proposing to you, as a nation, a
platform for action that represents a qualitative improvement over
everything that has been done before, and to do it on a platform of
principles that have been established by the most able pioneers and
the principles that are established in the nation's constitution.
Abraham Lincoln was such a leader, and Franklin Delanor Roosevelt, and
J. F. Kennedy. Didn't Kennedy say the following about the space
program to land a man on the moon? "We do it not because it easy,
but because it is hard." In other words, he roused society to
improve itself to the point that this challenge can be met. And it was
met. In addition, society was greatly enriched by the process of
meeting this challenge.
Baker Eddy expects a lot more from us than that. It expects society to
become a society of leaders itself, onto itself. She expects us to
learn the qualities of leadership that enables us to bring a
qualitative improvement into every situation that we face in our
private living, when we meet friends, when we are at work, wherever we
are. The end result will be, that we will lead richer lives. And, of
course, we will recognize the true qualities of leadership when it
comes to local or national elections. We will then recognize what
leadership is and seek it out, having embodied that quality of
scientific and spiritual cognition that uplifts human existence, in
our own lives. The same quality has also been the backbone of
America's industry, its entrepreneurship. We see it reflected in the
leading edge companies who saw a need in society for a product, and
saw a solution, and then lifted themselves up to meet the challenge to
make that solution available in the form of a new product. This was
the platform on which the once greatest nation on the planet was
The path to the future.
In the above context the
certification C.S.D. can be looked upon with new eyes as something that exists
at, and pertains uniquely, to the higher levels of awareness and
self-awareness. It represents those advanced concepts in scientific
understanding and beyond by which we begin to recognize and embrace
our own fundamental nature in the image of God.
higher background in terms of boundless scientific advancement and
self-authorization, the symbol CSD
represent the leading edge in humanity's fight for democratic freedom,
scientific freedom, and spiritual freedom. This is what the symbol is intended
to symbolize in respect to my website presentations.
The symbol CSD must therefore not be seen in terms of personal initials, but
in terms of the challenge that Mary Baker Eddy has put before humanity
as a whole, to step above the
lower levels of institutionally oriented existence, authorization,
etc., to the scientific
and spiritual domain of an infinite existence that reflects the illimitable
self-manifestation of God expressed in man as a cognizant being. The
symbol can summarily be
described to represent divine Science understood and acknowledged in
its broadest possible context.
Rolf. A. F.