After graduating High School in Washington State, I entered Colorado State University in the year 1979. The 1200 mile distance between me and my home circle did not break my embedded habits. I found another branch church of First Church of Christ, Scientist, and attended church, with a dwindling congregation, on a fairly regular basis. A question posed itself in my mind, How can a religion that had once been a national leader in Christian Science in the early 20th<\/sup> century reinvent itself as a community of spiritual power in the 21st<\/sup> century?<\/p>\n Contrary to popular opinion, the term Christian Science was not originally assigned to a religion or church, but to a system of metaphysical healing based on spiritual law. In the 19th<\/sup> century, Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910) defined Christian Science as \u201cthe law of good, interpreting and demonstrating the divine Principle and rule of universal harmony.\u201d (Rudimental Divine Science) <\/em>Eddy discovered this new\/old spiritual law, and taking a scientific approach, she learned how to tap into its power to benefit humanity. It could be said that Eddy engaged the power of Mind and spirituality through divine Science and because of her embedded proclivities to God and Christianity, the spiritual law was later<\/strong> juxtaposed with religion and church.<\/p>\n In 1867, Eddy began teaching other people her method of Christian healing. She taught for almost a decade before publishing her book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures <\/em>in 1875 to reach more people with her explanation of the power of Mind. Eventually in 1879, Eddy established First Church of Christ, Scientist, to promulgate Christian Science, and for the rest of her life she battled to keep the institution grounded on Christian Science, not an unrealistic human ideology.<\/p>\n Christian Science, in the form of religion, had a heyday during the end of Eddy\u2019s lifetime. Even after her death, magnificent branch church edifices\u2014filled with members of all ages and attendants from all backgrounds\u2014dotted the land, nay more, the world. But, typical to religion, time and change crept up and began suffocating the cultural or social force that bound the Christian Science community together. Uncannily, Christ Jesus\u2019 statement seemed to be confirmed, that \u201ca man\u2019s enemies will be the members of his own household.\u201d (Matt. 10:36, NIV). A reliance on unwritten church rules, instead of a reliance on God and independent thought and action, set the church on a dais to be maligned, especially when it came to member\u2019s decisions concerning medical care.<\/p>\n I was sensitive to the bad press mainly because I happen to be bearing and raising children during the 1980\u2019s when a rash of charges around the nation was brought against Christian Scientists whose children died under prayer treatment. The fact that children die every day under medical treatment did not condone Christian Science and certainly did not eliminate the fear factor. Consequently, I returned to the principles of Christian Science and learned in Eddy\u2019s Science and Health,<\/em> that God can guide \u201cinto the right use of temporary and eternal means,\u201d of healing.<\/p>\n I did feel God guide me, and our family experienced noteworthy spiritual healing. However, it was a decade before the upheaval in the religious organization settled down somewhat. On August 12, 1993, the Los Angeles Times <\/em>printed an article titled, Court Overturns Conviction of Christian Science Couple,<\/em> reading, \u201cBetween 1980 and 1990, seven Christian Science parents in the United States were prosecuted on charges ranging from murder and manslaughter to neglect. Four of those were convicted, with two convictions eventually being overturned. One set of parents pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, and two cases were dismissed.\u201d<\/p>\n However, the calm was besieged by more drama when millions of church dollars were spent to launch a multimedia broadcasting system. Regrettably, the executive decision from church headquarters instead launched the church membership into a divisive fury. The New York Times, <\/em>Peter Steinfels, stated in his article, Plan to Expand Church Media Reveals Christian Science Rift<\/em>, dated January 4, 1989, \u201cChristian Science, a faith that has come to epitomize a quiet, disciplined spirituality, is being rent by discord provoked by the denominations\u2019 rapid expansion into radio and television broadcasting.\u201d My own involvement in the Church confirmed the damning conclusion, yet history has taught me that schism and religion repeatedly go hand in hand therefore I gave divine Science the benefit of the doubt and continued to look for signs of renewal.<\/p>\n Then, I was caught in a terrible accident in 1998 and taken to the local hospital\u2019s emergency room. To make a long story short, I did not need the predicted surgeries or even pain relievers, and I was healed of 2nd<\/sup> degree burns on half of my face through Christian Science treatment, all within 3 weeks. But, more importantly my mind broke through the boundaries of religion bias and I noticed a vivid array of spiritual seekers and leaders from different denominations, or from no religious affiliation, who were welcoming people to discover spiritual principles that interpret wellbeing and happiness to the universe.<\/p>\n I also read books written by doctors and researchers who expounded on the benefits of spirituality. I realized, the hard and soft sciences are actually leading people to spiritual insights. Bruce Lipton, Ph.D., author of The Biology of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter, and Miracles,<\/em> wrote, “Genes are not destiny!\u201d Lipton now believes that, \u201cthe physical body can be affected by the immaterial mind,\u201d a mind of love.<\/p>\n In the year 2002, I traveled to Boston to attend a pre-opening of The Mary Baker Eddy Library and savored the sight of a renovated portion of The Christian Science Publishing Society that now houses a lending library and gallery. The multimedia venture had since gone defunct and interest in the church had changed. Although the Church more resembled a museum than a religion, I accepted the historical perspective.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.beliefnet.com\/sites\/269\/2012\/04\/cover-of-4th-edition-SH-small2.jpg\")
<\/a>![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.beliefnet.com\/sites\/269\/2012\/04\/L-me-propped-on-bike-small.jpg\")
<\/a>