by Rolf Witzsche
Divine Principle is absolute, unchangeable, and invariably reflects the nature of God that is Life, Love, Truth, Soul, Spirit, Mind. It is a constructive principle towards the manifestation of these aspects of God in man and the universe. On the platform of this divine Principle all healing occurs, and society prospers towards the realization of its infinite potential. If this platform is rejected humanity decays and civilization disintegrates into dust.
This effect of humanity's denial of divine Principle has been regarded for many ages as the vengeance of the Lord. Isn't it still being said about someone's ill deed, God will get you for this? In real terms, however, divine Principle includes nothing that punishes, inflicts vengeance, or even causes death. Throughout the ages the apparently punishing effects have been noted, and have been incorporated into numerous anecdotes, metaphors, and parables, some of which are also found in the Bible. If these are taken literally, the true image of God and divine Principle becomes lost and society puts itself into danger by not recognizing divine Principle for what it really is.
Let's take the anecdote, for instance, that is told in Acts 4 and 5. It is an anecdote about the Apostles, primarily Peter, and his work in establishing a rudimental form of Christianity based on universal principles, such as universal love, reflecting divine Love. The story is also about a denial of this principle resulting in death.
The above anecdote describes a society that is founded on the recognition of the singularity of Soul that is reflected in a respect for the dignity of each individual member of society as the image of God, with a corresponding commitment to the common welfare of all. The anecdote deals with the effects of an individual's denial of the recognized principle on which the society is founded.
The story of the anecdote almost portrays God as a murderer in vengeance. But can the divine Principle, Life and Love, incur death, or even punishment? The Apostle does not suggest suggest such a thing in the anecdote. The anecdote suggests however, that it is impossible for a person who consciously lives on a platform of denial of divine Principle, to remain alive in real terms in the shadow of this denial, even though God is Life. The anecdote apparently illustrates the invariable consequence of humanity's denial of divine Principle, and focuses on it dramatically for the benefit of society as a whole. This is what the great poets of tragedy have likewise done in modern times, like Germany's Friedrich Schiller, or England's Shakespeare.
If the divine Principle were to include punishment, not to mention punishment by death, the world would likely be an empty place, devoid of human beings. The history contained in the Scriptures is a history of the spiritual development of humanity that is a process of discovery of the nature of divine Principle and its manifest in human existence. Yes, human history is bloodied with countless murders, wars, and even the destruction of entire cultures and societies as under the Roman Empire that nearly destroyed civilization. It appears that this utter tragedy that results form the underlying denial of Principle, is the kind of result that the anecdote in Acts 5 illustrated, perhaps even forewarned.
Most likely the anecdote was intended as a warning to illustrate the dire effects on society of rejecting divine Principle. After all, Paul had a personal background in oligarchic society under his former name of Saul. Obviously, he understood its mode of operation centered on property values, greed, theft, power, and violence. Against this background, Paul's involvement with the development of Christianity would bring to light certain invariable facts that may otherwise not be noted. In contrast with what he had learned about the operation of divine Principle in the course of his remarkable transformation, he may have recognized the awesome abyss that society was moving towards by not addressing the underlying movements unfolding in its denial of divine Principle, just as we experience such movement once again in today's world. Our civilization is collapsing economically, morally, socially, and politically for the same reason that was recognized so long ago, and by and large society blames God for that collapse or even denies the existence of God altogether, and with it the existence of universal divine Principle.
Today's society defines its own principles (so-called), such as greed based economics, the supposed power of violence, the accumulation of wealth by stealing from society in countless clever ways. All of that has become totally legal, but no legislator can overrule the Principle of the universe, or divine Principle, and what it includes. Nor can legislation prevent the self-destruction of society as a consequence of its denial of divine Principle.
An allegory with a similar context than that found in Acts 5, which addresses the issue more directly, is found quite early in Scriptures. It is attributed to the famous patriarch, Abraham. In the allegory Abraham was informed by God of the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. The allegory is written as if God causes the destruction, which is a notion that does not accord with divine Principle. Abraham appears to be aware of this paradox to some degree and explores what might be done to prevent the destruction. The allegory is written in a manner that also shows that Abraham had a certain awareness that the impending demise of the city was really the consequence of the self-destruction of society by its erroneous pursuits in denial of the framework of divine Principle. So he explores what may be required for that society to reform itself in order that its self-destruction may not occur. "Are fifty righteous people enough to accomplish that," he asks God, as it were; "or forty, or thirty, or twenty, or even just ten?"
In every case God's answer was that what he suggests would be sufficient. It also appears that Abraham already knew the answers in his heart before the questions were voiced. He just wasn't honest enough with himself to accept what he already understood about the nature of divine Principle.
Dishonesty with oneself is one of the deepest denials of God as divine Principle, and of oneself as the reflection of the divine Principle in the universe. Dishonesty with oneself has become the most self-punishing scourge of society. The writer of the Ananias story in Acts 5 evidently understood this clearly. The story focuses totally totally on the scourge of society's dishonesty with itself and with one another. The person, Ananias, of the anecdote, was living a lie. He knew the truth, but acted in denial of it. In the story, his dishonesty with himself, his self-denial, cased his immediate death.
When I first read this story, I was appalled by it. The horrific sentence of death for such a 'small' act doesn't reflect the divine Principle, Love. Indeed it doesn't, but it reflects the inevitable consequences of living outside the sphere of the divine Principle, Love.
Did the writer of Acts 5 overstate the case? Did he exaggerate the consequences? History tells us that he didn't. The consequences of living outside the sphere of divine Principle, which is what the Roman Empire represented and institutionalized, were so utterly destructive to society that the Greek nation, for instance, which once stood at the forefront of the recognition of the civilization building principles, was reduced to a mere 16% of its former population size during the 'reign' of the Roman Empire that it had failed to prevent from being established.
It is plain that the writer of the Ananias story understood these consequences well. But was the demise of the Greek nation a case of dishonesty with itself? One must assume, given the high standard in scientific and spiritual awareness, that the Greek society was known for, that this society had been aware deep in its heart that it was being drawn into an environment that would be self-destructive. Still, it failed to rescue itself while there was still time.
The same thing is happening again throughout history, and continues to happen now. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that a society cannot prosper on a platform of stealing from one another instead of creating wealth through productive economic processes. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that such a society is on the fast track of destroying its civilization. Most people are consciously aware of this fact. Regardless of this innate awareness, however, our modern society has made the stealing from one another one of the chief cornerstones for its financial and economic activities, by which its fate is potentially sealed.
Do I hear any protests? Let me explain the process that is involved with an example from American history. A single example will suffice. Let us look at the stock market.
Originally the idea of the stock market was an idea for facilitating society's pooling of resources in order to advance its economic development. By this process everyone became richer. New products or services were developed that raised the standard of living of society and produced a reward for the investors out of the wealth created for society. The general welfare principle that is reflected in this model reflects to some degree the operation of the primitive Christian society described in Acts 4, which is built on the divine Principle of universal Love.
In our world all of this has changed under the rapid promotion of greed based economics as an economic principle (so-called). The focus had been shifted from economic development that enriched society, onto capital gain where profits are drawn from a process that doesn't produce anything, which profits were therefore essentially stolen from the living of society. Moreover, the theft-centered processes invariably collapse the physical economy of society as the result of the combined effect of the disinvestments into productive processes, and that of profit oriented looting.
The destructive process that were are presently caught up in, which is in its terminal phase, began in the mid 1960s. It has progressed through several decades and numerous stages of increasing intensity of looting, to the point that now the entire economic structure of the world, apart from a few exceptions, is disintegrating, and the world-financial system is disintegrating with it. The system is presently so far gone that 46 of the 50 U.S. State-governments are technically bankrupt as the result of the collapse in tax revenues that reflects the great loss in economic activity. But even with all of this is happening, and society being aware that it is happening and knowing deep in its heart the reason for it, it continues to devote its life to the process that it knows to be destructive to its existence. Society even elects the kind of leaders who virtually guarantee that the destructive processes will continue and be intensified until society as a whole disintegrates.
Was the writer of the Ananias story off the mark when he or she illustrated in that story, that society's dishonesty with itself has deadly consequences? These deadly consequences are already widely experienced in our modern world as hospitals are closed for the lack of funds, education degenerates, violence becomes glorified, and war and injustice become hailed as the new way of life for the future. This currently ongoing collapse into an all-embracing poverty is claiming countless lives daily, in a wave of silent death.
All of this is already happening, even while the collapse process is still in its infancy stage. And even at this stage society continues its dishonesty with itself by acting contrary to what it knows to be the foundation of civilization. Paradoxically, even when the root of this tragedy is pointed out to society, it continues its dishonesty with itself. Can you think of a greater and more lethal form of self-denial?
The subject of self-denial and dishonesty with oneself is one of the focal points in my 12 part series of novels, The Lodging for the Rose. The series explores the application of the principle of universal love at the grassroots social domain where society's self-denial is strong, though it has quite a different flavor there. Sadly, the scourge of dishonesty with oneself has become almost institutionalized and is being honored in these institution with the seal of respectability.
Christ Jesus understood that dishonesty with oneself is a complex and deeply rooted scourge. He pointed out to his disciple Peter, whose name means, Rock, which Jesus gave him in recognition of his steadfastness, that even he would deny him in public before the cock crows thrice, which did indeed happen for the sake of convenience, as it were.
The point is that a great many things may have to be purged from consciousness before our celebration of God as divine Principle can even begin on an honest basis. This also includes a lot of other aspects that we would rather sweep under the rug and not deal with in a decisive manner. Mary Baker Eddy was obviously aware of the difficulty involved in dealing with these aspects. In order to help us, she created all of her major works in the form of interlocked pedagogical structures designed to advance our moral, spiritual, and scientific development. Her evident goal was to get society to begin thinking in terms of universal principles as an aid for becoming honest with itself, and also to develop a certain sense of scientific honesty and integrity as a prerequisite for being able to honestly celebrate the nature and reality of God.
It may have been for the fact that none of her structures were even recognized to exist before her days drew a close, that she caused her picture to be removed from the front pages of her textbook on Christian Science, if indeed this was her intent. It is said that the galley sheets with the removal were simply initialed by her.
If it was her intent, what is she trying to tell us with that?
For many years, May Baker Eddy has been working mentally and physically, specifically for the welfare of humanity. She is said to have devoted herself to the task as often as three times a day. It is even suggested that her healing influence, which has uplifted the life of countless individuals, may have held back the onset of World War I, and may have nearly succeeded. Historians tell us that the political movements towards this war had been in the works since the latter part of the 1980s, and that there had been numerous hopeful signs that this war can be avoided. Obviously it wasn't. World War I started three years after her passing, and a lot of bad things that humanity is still suffering from, were unleashed slightly sooner, such as the founding of the Federal Reserve System that took society's currency in the U.S. out of the public domain and placed it into the hands of profit oriented private business, - the first privatization of society's wealth - forming a central bank under oligarchic control, modeled essentially after the imperial Bank of England. The move was on from this moment forward, for a radical shift away from the general welfare principle that the USA had been founded on and which had also been the central feature of the social background behind the Ananias story in Acts 5.
Mary Baker Eddy stood uncomplaining guard over a world that she could see was rapidly moving away from whatever was left of society's honesty with itself. There wasn't even enough honesty in society to really look at what she had created, or to acknowledge what may have been discovered about it, as we have it at the present time. Perhaps she removed her portrait from the textbook of her science to cause people to open their eyes and look beyond her person in order to discover the still undiscovered major aspects of her work. Also, the removal may have been a warning to society of an impending tragedy along the line of the Ananias story. She may have been staying, watch out, what have you got without me, without my example, without recognizing what I stood for and have created for the advance of humanity.
She may have also been appalled that the removal of her portrait was urged by the directors and some people, as may have been the case, and may have asked, can you really celebrate God without my name attached in some intimate way with that celebration; without the process of discovery that brought to light what is reflected in my own lifelong celebration of God? She may have been saying, be honest with yourself and acknowledge that without that foundation in scientific discovery, that I represent, you have but a shell.
She may have conceded to the radical step of removing her picture from her textbook of the science that she discovered and founded, in a final attempt to move society to a higher platform of honesty with itself as is reflected in the Ananias story in Acts 5.
Some day her picture will most likely be restored when society rediscovers itself and its roots in God, and on that basis survives the age of nuclear weapons that is now upon us. That possibility certainly exists, even while the dangers of which people are fully aware of deep in their heart is being swept under the rug so to speak as society knows that the nuclear weapons potential portents to the end of humanity.
The Ananias story in Acts 5 should puzzle us today as it illustrates the process that closes the door to an honest celebration of God as divine Principle, Life. In order to celebrate God in all the seven colors of the divine nature, as Life, Love, Truth, Spirit, Mind, Soul, and Principle, we have no option but to put Mary Baker Eddy's picture back into the equation as a link to the pioneering process of recognizing and understanding universal principles that reflect the divine Principle which she stood for and had devoted her life to.
Indeed, there is controversy unfolding in the field over these changes as some people suggest that the removal of her picture was not really her intent. The controversy started over another change in another one of the most fundamental of her works, the Church Manual, the body of By-Laws that document the structural design that governs the church. The change that was introduced there, which was introduced again in the last days before her passing, totally revamps the basic structure of her church. Before that change, the basic structure that Mary Baker Eddy had created for her church provided for an institution of branch churches which were by their very design a union of totally sovereign entities, logistically supported by a central service organization called the Mother Church, which too, was designed as a totally sovereign entity. This structure as a whole created a lateral relationship throughout the entire field in which no one was greater, all existing in community of a common recognition of underlying principles. With this structure Mary Baker Eddy has established a pioneering concept of government, and a model for humanity's self-government, and the individual recognition of the nature of man.
The Mother Church had been given its own form of government by Mary Baker Eddy, totally based on constitutional principles, which too represents the most advanced pioneering form of government ever created, governed by a set of By-Laws that she stipulated should not be adopted by the branch churches, probably as the foundation lay beyond what could be reasonably expected in the field. This body of By-Laws for the Mother Church, includes the order of service for the Mother Church. A minute modification was introduced in this body of By-Laws, which applies that order of service as a matter of dictum to the entire field, thereby eradicating the principle of the universal sovereignty of the branch churches.
In practice the change didn't change the services throughout the world significantly, since most branch churches had adapted that order by their own choice. The modification did, however, change the principle of the relationship within the entire church structure. The original lateral relationship that reflects the principle of sovereignty was gone. It was replaced with the stroke of a pen, with a vertical relationship of top-down oligarchic control. This new 'vertical' control subsequently became the norm in practice.
The minute modification in the By-Laws which changed so much and so deeply, must be recognized as a fundamental overturning. It represents a fundamental shift away from the nature of divine Principle, the universality of Soul and Love, to its opposite, with far reaching consequences that reflect the change of the perceived nature of man. I have focused on this radical difference between the lateral and vertical models of relationships in my five part series of novels, The Lodging for the Rose. The difference is explored there in the social context, of course, and that is done from a deeply seated historic political background, leading up to the spiritual and scientific principles involved.
Some people question the legitimacy for the modifications that were made in the structure of the church, by which Mary Baker Eddy's original design for it was scrapped and replaced with an opposite model. People find it remarkable that these deep reaching modifications were made without an explanation by her to the field and without her full signature to confirm them, and also that they were imposed literally within days before her passing away.
My reason for bringing this subject up is not to bore the reader with apparently insignificant details or an unfolding controversy that can be easily resolved. Indeed, with the stroke of a pen the modifications enacted in December 1910 can be eliminated, by which the structure of the church and its functioning would be restored. I am bringing this subject up, because the same type of deep reaching modification that was enacted in 1910, that represents a sweeping denial of fundamental divine Principle, was enacted again shortly thereafter in the public domain by which the original platform on which the U.S. nation was founded, was scrapped, and was likewise replaced with an opposite platform. I am bringing this up, because from this moment on the U.S. nation was put on a course that assured its dying from within.
The denial of Principle in the public domain, that I am referring to, was enacted in 1913 with an act of Congress in which the principle of the universal sovereignty of society was eliminated, and was replaced with a vertical system of top down control over society. By this act the nation's currency was taken from society, was privatized, and put under the control of a for profit, private institution, known as the Federal Reserve. Even the chosen name for the new central bank that was created, incorporates a deception. The deception was evidently indented to hide the overturning of Principle that is involved, because the Federal Reserve is by its very design not a federal institution, but a private institution which is owned by shareholders and is operating for its shareholders' profit rather than in the interest of the general welfare of society as a whole.
The end of 1910 marks the beginning of a major global shift away from divine Principle in many areas of public affairs, which continued on with many more successive steps.
A year after the overturning of the principle of universal sovereignty by an act of Congress, in establishing the Federal Reserve in 1913, World War I was unleashed that had long been agitated for by imperial interests. With the start of this war the denial of principle was extended. By it, one of the chief principles of the Treaty of Westphalia, that guaranteed to universal sovereignty of all nations, was thrown to the wind. Humanity is still suffering from the after-effects of this war in terms of its lost realization in self-development. World War I was clearly organized as an imperial war to prevent the self-development of society on a large scale, provisions for which had been put in place for uplifting the entire Eurasion continent.
Many subsequent wars were fought, and this in many different ways, but they were always focused on the same objective and were based on the same fundamental denial of divine Principle.
Even before the USA became fully established as an independent entity, a new and still more subtle type of war was formulated against it. Lord Shelburne of the British East India Company had commissioned Adam Smith during carriage ride to develop an economic weapon against the aspiring new nation. The result of it became his famous apologia of free-trade. After the British Empire failed to retake its American colonies on the battle field, Shelburne found a way to make himself Prime Minister for a brief period in which he made sure that Adam Smith's free-trade weapon was incorporated like a Trojan Horse, into the Paris Peace Treaty. As expected, the weapon was included, and was accepted by America, which, within a few years was bankrupted thereby.
In total contradiction to what the name implies, free-trade economics is not build on respecting the sovereignty of nations and the principle of universal love. To the contrary, it opens the door to a free, unrestrained, and completely legal top-down vertical domination of society that assures an empire unrestrained access to other nation's resources and leads to the entrapment of their society into underdevelopment and virtual slavery. Alexander Hamilton understood the denial of universal Principle that Adam Smith's Trojan Horse had brought to America, and subsequently overturned it. With that profound recognition he rescued his nation from the bankruptcy that free-trade had brought upon it. But Adam Smith had been asked by Shelburne to develop two such weapons. The second weapon was to be based on a study of the collapse of the Roman Empire. That second weapon, evidently became Adam Smith's famous postulate of greed based economics which apparently its grand opening day a bit late, coinciding with the founding of the Federal Reserve system by which the makeup of the nation was radically altered. (Preceded in a similar fundamental way by the Specie Resumption Act of 1875)
With the divine Principle of lateral relationships put far out of sight and out of mind, progressing forward from those early steps to obliterate any notion for advancing the general warfare of society, which became scrapped and supplanted by greed, the full legalization of society's stealing from one another was put into full gear. All of this developed towards the inevitable consequence in the form of the great depression that erupted a few years later.
In today's world, the denial of Principle has been much farther advanced. The free-trade weapon, especially the financial version of it that placed virtually all of the word's currencies into private hands for profit, has grown into a monster that has turned the entire world-financial architecture into a hollow shell with no real principle in support of it. In the background, what once was economics in real terms - a process that develops riches for society through the creation of resources and industries by means of the development of the human mind for the benefit of society in an universal lateral relationship - has been turned into an orgy of legalized theft on a near global scale under the banner of greed based economics for which there exists no principle. Is it any wonder that the world's physical economies disintegrate.
One can see in this a parallel to the transformation that was started in 1910. Indeed, it may well be the end result of it. The Ananias story in Acts 5 indicates that the denial of divine Principle invariably leads to death as a consequence. This is what society is already experiencing to some degree as a consequence of an ever deeper denial of divine Principle. Nor will it be easy to get out of this trap. The world is encased with a spider web of free-trade treaties and countless greed based economic structures that have destroyed the world economy, but which are so thick that there is little hope that they can ever be untangled. And why should society even try since the entire mess is merely the end result of decades of denial of divine Principle reflected in humanity.
In other words, the path to the bright future that humanity has within its reach, and always had, that leads to the celebration of God as divine Principle, leads past the ash can of history that needs to be richly blessed with donations freely given, of aspects of denial of Principle that society at the present time still deeply cherishes. The present devotion of society to ever deeper denials of divine Principle needs to be overturned into ashes, in a celebration of God as divine Principle and all that is synonymous with God. We really don't have any other choice if we expect to survive, and live, and prosper on this planet.
The only political leader that currently addresses the fundamental error in society that caused its moral, physical, and political collapse is the American economist and statesman Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr. He suggest, no he literally demands, that society overturn the entire pyramid of denials upon denials of fundamental principles, reaching all the way back to the 1875 Specie Resumption Act that took away the American society's currency and superimposed another. That act formed the first step in destroying the basis in Principle on which the U.S. nation was founded in the first place.
In reversing all that, Lyndon LaRouche upholds the Principle of the universality of Love reflected in the general welfare principle that the USA had been founded on as the first true nation-state republic on the planet. He upholds the general welfare principle as it was implemented by Alexander Hamilton in the early days of the Union, and later by President Franklin Delanor Roosevelt who lifted the nation out of its deepest depression to becoming the greatest and richest economic and moral force on the planet on the basis of this principle.
LaRouche also lobbies worldwide for the return to the best features of Roosevelt's global application of the general welfare principle, the Bretton Woods monetary agreements that gave humanity an equitable basis for sovereign lateral relationships with fixed values for the nation's currencies. This acknowledgement of the principle behind the general welfare principle had proven itself as absolutely essential for effective global trade and economic development.
LaRouche acknowledges the necessity for getting back to these fundamental principles of civilization, and what stands behind them, such as the Principle of universal sovereignty and universal love. Lyndon LaRouche also acknowledges that this renewed focus on absolute Principle must first and foremost be centered on the Eurasian landmass, the development of which has been twice prevented by war, but which is absolutely essential as a driver to rescue the European economies, all of Africa, and the economies of the American continents as well. The principles that he acknowledges and labors to implement are truely rooted in divine Principle. Nothing short of society's refocusing on these principles, all of which have been denied for far too long, can assure the survival of our civilization, if not the survival of humanity as a whole that hangs precariously in the balance in the nuclear age. In a very real sense, the survival of civilization, and possibly our own survival, depends entirely on LaRouche's success in ending humanity's denial of its divine Principle, and thereby its own denial.
Still, the reversal of errors that needs to be accomplished doesn't end there. In some cases society totally abhors what the divine Principle represents. This phenomenon of a still deeper denial, likewise needs to be overturned into a celebration of divine Principle. An example of this kind is found in the abhorrence of Love and its principle of universality in the social domain.
What! you will say. Who abhors love? The answer is that we all do it. Divine Love can only exist as universal Love. Consequently, it must be so reflected in the human domain, including at the social level, including in our marriages, where the very notion of universal love is abhorred. Nevertheless, everyone of Mary Baker Eddy's cases of healing were acknowledged by those who were healed, as having been 'carried' by a remarkable outpouring of universal divine Love, that many have said was a kind of love that they had never felt before or even had thought to be possible.
It is a sad fact that the very notion of universal Love that people so deeply long for, is at the same time deeply abhorred by society in countless ways. In the social domain of our marriages, for instance, the principle of universal love is regarded as absolute treason. That notion goes so deep, with challenges so great, that my most daring exploration of universal love in the social domain became a series of five novels. All five novels were required to explore the blessings that can unfold socially in the sphere of universal love, without which our celebration of God as universal divine Love will forever be incomplete if indeed we have anything to celebrate at all when we deny the very essence of divine Love, which is its universality. The series of novels is the one mentioned already earlier in this article, with the title: The Lodging for the Rose.
Did Mary Baker Eddy expect society to move in the direction of universal love, reflecting the essence of divine Love, that is, the universality of divine Love? The answer is that Mary Baker Eddy makes no such demands in the Church Manual, under discipline. Neither did she make a provision in her church for the conventional marriage institution in which the principle of universal love is traditionally abhorred. It is, as if she is saying to society, don't go there! Step up to a higher platform!
Still, Mary Baker Eddy didn't close the door to the conventional marriage scene entirely, since a legal platform for the embrace of universal love in the social domain does not as yet exist or is difficult to implement. Perhaps it was in the spirit of Christ Jesus' comment, "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill (to uplift)," that Mary Baker Eddy leaves the door open to the conventional marriage structure by way of enlisting the services of another church's clergy for that purpose.
The principle of universal Love may be the most challenging for society to embrace. It has been under attack for many ages. Under the politicized version of the Decalogue it incurred the death penalty. And later again, during the great assault on the Renaissance spirit in the mid 1500s it was regarded synonymous with treason against the state to even suggest that love has a role to play in the political domain, even the slightest role. People could be executed for suggesting that. An eighty year period of some of the most horrible wars in history was the soon thereafter realized outcome of this deep denial of divine Principle, Love. During that period of wars, especially near the end of it, half of the population of Europe was destroyed. The end of the wars did not come until in 1648 a faint expression of the principle of universal love was realized again. The realization came in the form of the recognition and acceptance of the principle of the universal sovereignty of nations. That single recognition of Principle that overturned a previous denial of it, ended eighty years of warfare that resulted from that denial. That's a heavy price to pay, isn't it? Unfortunately, that is the price that society lays upon itself for its denial of the divine Principle and its universality of Love.
Sadly, we still pay that price today. Isn't it still being said in so many ways that love has no place in business? Business is business. And in the political realm, too, love is banned. The focus is on countless forms of imperial rule enforced with overwhelming military power, and if need be, with nuclear bombs. Most of today's society simply laughs at the notion that civilization and the future of humanity rests on the platform of universal Love, expressed to some degree by the general welfare principle that the USA had been founded on, which for a few brief periods had been that nation's guiding light and the root for its prosperity. Today's laughter, though, needs to be turned into tomorrow's celebration of God as universal divine Love. That's the challenge we face.
Another area in which society is far from celebrating the divine nature is found in its denial of divine Spirit. Society has embraced a spirit of discontent that is totally devoid of the hues of divine Spirit. Society's spirit has become a spirit of emptiness, filled with violence and expensive pursuits of material indulgence that afford it no profit, but which in many cases destroy the fabric of society and its economic and cultural support structures. Society has a long way to go on the road of pulling itself out of this trap, the trap of discontent in rejecting the divine Spirit in which the nature of man comes to light as the image of God.
This discontent has a deep root in human history that can be traced as far back as Aristotle who coined the theory of natural slavery as the reality of man's being in which the mass of humanity is deemed to be so devoid of 'virtue' that it needs to be ruled over for its own good, by superior people which came to be known as the Aristocracy. That dreadful notion was taken up by many philosophers in the 16th Century and thereafter, typified by Thomas Hobbes, and was extended further by their argument that humanity is so corrupt by its very nature that it needs to surrender its sovereignty totally into the hands of a Sovereign as the only means to protect itself from itself. That notion is still alive in many respects, socially, religiously, politically, and ideologically. The truth, however is, that there is a spirit in man that is the divine Spirit manifest in man and the universe. All the great cultural achievements in human history reflect this divine Spirit in art, music, literature, scientific achievements, generosity, and great public works that enrich the human society. In these we find the divine image of man, and the divine Spirit manifested.
I have touched upon just a few aspects where we have still a long way to go before we can reach the stage where we begin to honestly celebrate the nature and reality of God in our individual living. That this essential breakthrough must be made is clearly put forth in the opening statement of Moses' Decalogue which suggest that society should love God with all its heart, mind, and soul, to the fullest possible extend. Mary Baker Eddy provided a vast pedagogical foundation towards the realization of this goal. She did not only discover and establish the Science of Christianity, which she called Christian Science, she also brought all of her works into structural conformity with a fundamental scientific structure that is rooted in the Apostle John's vision as a foundation for the end of all evil. In metaphoric terms John presents a foursquare city descending form God out of heaven in which there would be no night forever. Mary Baker Eddy utilized the foursquare structure as foundation on which she founded all of her works, which thereby come to light as a pedagogical structure of a magnificence and expanse in scope that will carry humanity's moral, spiritual, and scientific development possibly for all times to come.
The mere fact this pedagogical structure is presently denied to exist in our age of comprehensive denials of the divine manifestation in man and the universe, does not detract from its importance and its potential to uplift humanity to the divine height of its native air and sunshine reflecting the divine. John saw this divine image of man as a woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet and on her head a crown of twelve stars, which Mary Baker Eddy referred to as the stars of rejoicing. Here our celebration of God begins, which also unfolds as a celebration of ourselves in every aspect of God that our celebration embraces.
for more on the
above structures see
All-In-One Christian Science
a major research site by Rolf Witzsche
Return to Index