Are intimacy and infinity in opposition? This question summarizes the concerns of the member who requested our topic for prayerful consideration this week. He says he often feels himself unable to grasp more than a hazy sense of infinite, absolute Truth, as presumably available through Christian Science. Several of those in attendance shook their heads in agreement.

We had a large meeting and therefore a variety of ways to approach the problem and proposed methods for bringing the infinite into intimate focus. Our facilitator — i.e., the one who brought up the topic — started us off with some statements by Jesus from Luke and John; see the readings, above. Everyone seemed to agree that we must turn within to find our contact with divine consciousness. It's not "out there."

One member cautioned that in Science, any belief that God is in us is erroneous ("IN. A term obsolete in Science if used with reference to Spirit, or Deity" Science and Health, p. 588: 22-23). Indeed, another member said she felt more in tune with the idea that God includes all within Himself.

Next we turned to some of Mrs. Eddy's teachings on prayer (see the readings above Science and Health, p. 15: 14-30). The silencing of the material senses called for there reminded one member of the technique he uses daily in his practice of Transcendental Meditation (TM), where the senses are transcended by use of a mantra repeated throughout the 20 minute meditation. The state of consciousness then reached is basically where Scientists reside in their prayerful treatment — at-one-ment with and as divine Mind. It turned out we had three Transcendental Meditators in our midst and the rest of us were able to ask questions as to its use in healing (it is so used) and whether it leads to other-worldliness. (It's meant to bolster normal, harmonious human functioning). What does it feel like in the transcendent state? Like being asleep but fully conscious.

From this discussion we could see that intimacy with the divine energies requires some work, some turning away from our usual state of mind to a deeper, or perhaps fuller, apprehension of what God is seeing and doing. But the use of human language, fused as it is with the material, can mislead us into a personal sense of Christian Science where fetters do not fall and great frustration ensues. A member stated that he did not really understand the Christian Science teaching about the impersonality of Truth until he had practiced TM for a while.

This launched us into the most contentious segment of the evening. Several members spoke fervently of the need for Christian Scientists to be loving in their dealings with others. One talked of an unfortunate experience with a cold, mechanical and, of course, unhealing practitioner. Another pointed to Mrs. Eddy's writings which urge her followers to be loving (see for instance Science and Health, p. 367: 3-9 about Christian Science being "... aflame with divine Love," as well as the first four pages of the chapter on "Christian Science Practice" covering the relationship of Jesus and Mary Magdalen).

Everyone appeared to agree that we must be loving to one another, but those who saw the impersonality of Truth still scrambled to find ways to convey what they were seeing to the doubters. One came up with the illustration of the infinite laws of mathematics. Even now no one knows them all and yet we can use what we do know to solve very personal or intimate problems. Impersonal laws, personal problems/solutions. Another member ventured the thought that all sciences and arts are based on impersonal laws. When and where the "rubber meets the road" is the Christ (infinite or impersonal) Jesus (intimate or personal) demonstration — the divine human event — effected through Christian Science.

There followed some discussion of how to reach the healing absolute without meditation or prayerful treatment per se (although one could certainly style what follows as both — another member did just that by referring us to Genesis 1: 31 and Mrs. Eddy's statement about seeing man in Science, Science and Health, p. 476:32-2). A member quoted a statement from Margaret Laird, "Let the seeming be the Being and the Being will then be the seeming." He talked of healings experienced in medical offices by using the actual medical imagery presented to help find the impersonal Truth that quickly healed the situations. The cramped quarters of medical belief — a kind of intimacy —  had yielded to infinite Truth which in turn then ruled in the realm of the relative!

Time was running short and we had only a few moments to discuss the election results. Framing the situation in terms of our topic, Principle (infinity) could be trusted, leaned upon to bring forth a felicitous result (or appropriate intimacy).

Everyone still seemed to have lots to say or work with on our topic; so we'll go forward with it for another week.