Monday, May 09, 2016

Reply to comment on previous post

**I’m always impressed when someone notices this blog, which I write mostly for my own amusement. Once in a while there comes a courteous, thoughtful comment that I appreciate. This is one that came through, anonymously, recently. It’s worth a complete post and not just a reply in the comment section. I’ve included the commenter’s text in italics. 

This is your blog. Your space. Your MT space. So if others come here to read & comment, hopefully it's out of respect & consideration.

Yes, it’s my space but it’s a public place. Anyone can come and read and make comments. It’s the way blogs work. But I wish all commenters were as gracious as you. Thanks.

You being a former CS teacher/lecturer, you're bound to be remembered by some in the small-world CS community where you were known by many. 

Yes, I met many good-hearted people during that trek through the desert. Only a few of them have stayed friends with me since I left, and I value them. 

Being that CS is a practice of mental grappling & reasoning, out of the spirit of respectful consideration, you may have some here who are innately different from your current perspective, making comment.

Yes, I expect such.

Regarding your comments that "There is no spiritual healing," and "the CS movement is coming to a grinding halt," how could you possibly know? These claims are as unscientific & unsubstantiated as what you are claiming to be unscientific & unsubstantiated!

I beg to differ. Thirty five years in the religion and half of that as a practitioner and teacher never showed me an actual healing that could be verified by the same kinds of rigorous standards used in medicine or in public health. In fact, as noted in the post, during those years I saw lots of people encouraged to wear their failures on their bodies for all the world to see. And if you follow the link, you can see where I starred in one of the most painful tragedies imaginable: encouraging a mother not to seek the simple medical treatment that would have kept her child alive. I can never forget that, though for several years I tried. 

As the post noted (and as others of my posts have also) a reasonable person would “follow the money.” It’s a pretty good indicator of what people think will do them some good. The money isn’t going into spiritual healing. And not just because Big Pharma has a lot of influence. It’s because nobody is coming forward submitting a physical healing that can be reliably tested. Everything is still in the realm of the anecdotal. Even the CS pubs don’t ask that "healings" be verified by professionals. The only requirement is that the testifier and “witnesses” have good reputations, which smacks of collusion.

If even one CS healing would pass an objective, professional examination, and if the result could be replicated over a wide range of conditions and time, there might be serious interest in what produced it. In that case CS healing could become a big BUSINESS, because people would flock to a method that resulted in such convincing proof of healing. It isn’t happening.

How many practitioners are actually making a living solely from the work they do as pracs? I could never make it, and I was somewhat popular. And most of the pracs would not be in the business if not for wealth outside of income from the practice. Many have spouses who work. Many are just plain wealthy, making their practice more a hobby than real work. And a few, mostly young people, are willing to live at a subsistence level for a time. Pracs may be busy, but it’s mostly because (mostly elderly) people call for inspiration and support as they struggle with the inevitable physical and mental issues associated with aging. Either that or if they’re teachers, they have a ready-made pool of starstruck customers willing and eager to sustain them.

Bedside manner is actually the most potent element of a successful CS practice. People can be talked out of psychosomatic problems, talked into feeling more hopeful and less stressed (stress being a major component of many problems), or given little busywork assignments that help them ignore the fact that physically they aren’t getting better and in most cases are getting worse. I’ve been in the same room with pracs on the phone troweling on platitudes to people who call them, often every day. This is not spiritual healing. It is a consensual con game. Somewhat useful, but not marketable to a public that simply wants to be cured, and not just schmoozed. 

As for the “movement,” it is hardly moving, growing gelatinous as it wanes. I used to work in the 26-story “Administration” building on the CS campus. Even then there were some floors only sparsely populated. But now the whole building is leased out to non-church occupants. It's a pretty clear sign of less “administration” to do. The former Colonnade building is now named for its address and is occupied by Northeastern University. Obviously the church is on life-support from its property holdings and other investments, and not from the bequests and contributions of its increasingly expiring members.

It’s even gotten to the point that today when a case of child abuse based on spiritual healing practice makes the news, Christian Science is hardly ever mentioned, other than as an historical reference. CS parents are now too smart (or afraid) to rely on spiritual healing for their kids, because they don’t want to be arrested and have their lives and faces plastered across the news media for being guilty of child abuse. And they’re also patronizing medical practitioners and pharmacies like everyone else, but more or less sub rosa

To a certain logic, all may appear to be one thing, but what if the framework of that logic only represents a level or layer of comprehension that is infinitesimally small? What if there is way more going on underneath that is just not known or understood to that logic? What if there IS a lot more to a man than the physical body?

You can go as low or as high as you want, but in the end people want actual healing in their lives. Practical results. Not just a good feeling, or patience with their pain and disabilities. Or even a satisfying theory. They don’t want some intellectual abstraction, some fondly wished for reality. They have a pain, or a functional failure or a deformity and they want to get back to normal. Normal as in humanly normal. Until CS can deliver that kind of result, it will remain a mind game and a conspiracy, won’t generate much interest and will continue to diminish as an influence in the world. My post was ultimately about being in step with reality vs. simply being theoretical. You can be logical within a theory but if you start off wrong you will end wrong (even MBE said something like  that). 

The shoes of CS do not fit everyone. 

Because most people don't want to contort themselves to fit a rigid, fruitless mold. MBE claimed that physical healing would verify the validity of CS. We have yet to see that evidence.

That is to be expected in our big world. One would not expect a ballet dancer to moon-light as a logger. Different shoes. In those two worlds, one could not be the expert of the other's field. 

The "field" we're talking about isn't a specialty. It's normal human life

A non-believer cannot claim to be an expert of the beliver's field - it simply cannot be. Different realms & different focuses of thought.

Whoa! I AM an expert in this field. For too much of my lifetime I studied it, practiced it, taught it, lectured about it, wrote about it and went to jail for it. Don't tell me I'm not an expert.

The post you’ve commented on was exactly on your point. One can be completely  consistent with a theory but ultimately wrong because one's premise was wrong. Intellectual consistency and logic just don’t matter to someone with a cancerous organ, or a cataract, or a blocked artery. The ONLY thing that matters is that the diseased condition is reversed and normalcy re-established. Whatever your “realms or focuses of thought,” the pain, the malfunction, the contagion, the deformity and so forth inhabit the only real dimension of interest to a sick person. Make a conclusive demonstration in that realm and you will get the millions to investigate and take up your belief.

Otherwise slide into history like the Shakers, who at least made something useful.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thanks so much for taking the time to respond in such detail. I wrote the first reply. Your experience & perspective do matter. I don't agree with some of your delineations, but I think you're a great guy, and that motivates a lot of your thinking. I still think of you as a wing-man, even if you challenge certain things. In my opinion, some things need to be challenged. Not theology, but cultural things. In that sense, that's probably why I'm drawn to still seek out & engage with your spirit of observing & honestly speaking what you think. Hope you're doing well :-)

Victor Mariano said...

Thanks. The ""ology" in theology refers to the knowledge or study of something. So I agree with you that the concept of god can be known about and studied. But so can the knowledge or study of other fantasies, like Santa Claus, etc. So to that extent we are in agreement. I graduated from a Jesuit college so I had plenty of theology before I started the CS version of it. Which "cultural things" do you challenge?

Anonymous said...

Organizational culture. Societal culture. Conservatism in its broadest sense. Same things Paul struggled with seeing in the early churches. Dogma, pride, vanity. Fear, tradition. Not much you can do about all that as it seems to be part of the human condition, but it seems to weigh against religious organization. :-)

Victor Mariano said...

Yes, these basic human qualities weigh against any kind of progress. But what weighs against any kind of religiosity is reason. As today’s world becomes one of greater and greater transparency and accessibility to a greater diversity of ideas, the chokehold most religions hold on the minds of members is being released. People are seeing that the orthodoxy they’re pressured to embrace just doesn’t make any sense. That’s why the US is swiftly moving in the direction of secularism, with more and more of them identifying as “nones” when asked about religious preference.

Anonymous said...

Mario, knowing what you know about the Christian Science perspective on materia medica, given the influence of Big Pharma and all their work to sell their pills, who's side are you on for protecting the freedom of the unknowing masses? Especially with the growing prescription drug abuse/addiction problems. Aren't the drug companies increasingly trying to sell the notion that the human condition is ripe for all number of things that need their products, that the human body needs to be dosed, and not the mental/mind influence on the body? How can CS be so bad if it just gives the world this alternative, or exists to be discovered by anyone who might hope there is something other than the shackles of bio-chemical medicine?

Victor Mariano said...

CS gives the world as valid an alternative as The Flat Earth Society. It’s dangerous if you’re stupid enough to believe in it, otherwise it’s just an antiquarian oddity. The “mental/mind influence on the body” is not as powerful as physical factors like microbes, runaway cell division, dysfunctional organs and the like. At best – and as I’ve said – a deft bedside manner can reduce fear and stress and thereby aid in the body’s or a medicine’s healing effectiveness (but you don’t need a 19th century-based philosophy to practice that effectively). Schmoozing platitudes cannot reverse the disease itself. One of my favorite rejoinders to assertions about spiritual healing is the statement embodied by the website whywontgodhealamputeees.com. Has the world ever heard of an amputee restored to wholeness through prayer? Nope. Hard to be psychosomatic about an amputated limb, and therefore not something that the patient can be talked out of.

I agree that Big Pharma is too big and too marketing-oriented and too influential in government. But there are medicines and surgical procedures that are quite effective, I’m the beneficiary of both and am grateful for them and for those who have tended to my many ills. I once prayed as hard as I could but could not best a simple insulin injection for a child who was dying of diabetes. He died, but would not have if I and his mother hadn’t been loyal to the CS ethos.

I hope it’s clear that I am an informed opponent of CS, its church and its practitioners.

Anonymous said...

Guess we'll just be disagreeing then. But you're right, platitudes don't do anything to combat the problems of the human condition. I think it takes earnest spiritual devotion & understanding to weigh on the side of spirit to really make a difference when faced with humanity's physical challenges. The Bible is open for interpretation, obviously with the number of sects there are. But if interpreting it as that God is the creator, and within His creation all is well, but that mortal man has found himself in a state of thinking he is separate from God, hence his identity in the flesh, the Bible is a reminder to man that God is our creator, that we do have a spiritual identity that is good, and that God loves us. Kind of like the lyrics to the 70's Dylan tune, "Tangled Up in Blue,"... "it was written in my soul from me to you," the Bible was written out of truth from God to man, about God's unending love for man. :-)

www.bobdylan.com/songs/tangled-blue/

Anonymous said...

Also, I'm sorry for what you relayed about the child that passed & that you had to take a fall for that, too. Can only imagine all that you gave during those years (that you were involved in CS). This will be my last post on all of this. Thank you, Mario.

Victor Mariano said...

OK, that's it for me too. But thanks for the opportunity to clarify and restate my position. I know it looks like I'm simply bitter because of the child incident. But it's more than that, though that should be enough for anyone.

A shadow with heavenly intent. said...

Dear Mr. Toto,
I understand opposing the Church and it's practitioners.
However, Christian Science or in other words "the law of God, Good..." (Eddy)
saved my life. I follow Eddy only as she followed Christ. I read her work with God and Christ as my ultimate interpreter of the words and I employ the help of medical doctors on occasion, as Eddy also did.
We must remember Eddy wrote in a time when buying and taking medicine was more likely to harm than help.
No one is an expert on this law of good, but to strive to understand and practice it, is by definition good.

Victor Mariano said...

You make some broad statements (and typos) based on unsubstantiated assumptions, Just because Eddy says something doesn't mean it's true. There is no "law of God, Good." There is no demonstrable god. Anyone can be "good" without a god.

Just because you say something saved your life, is not a proof. You offer no substantiation. No one has. It's just a claim, as specious as Eddy's. As specious as if I claimed that eating spinach makes me instantly strong enough to fight Popeye.

Of course you "employ the help of medical doctors." It works a lot better than ignoring your problems while you contemplate soothing statements by misguided 19th century authors.

A shadow with heavenly intent. said...

Because you and admittedly no one are experts on the law of good doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I don't believe in an anthropomorphic god.

Understanding good is the work of eternity.

Victor Mariano said...

You are locked inside your bubble and cannot be engaged in rational conversation. You might want to read the posts here that go back more than a decade and see if you can become enlightened in what good thinking and conversation are about. Then maybe we can continue.

A shadow with heavenly intent. said...

We all do have our bubbles don't we. I'll let yours pop of its own doing.