LoraHoward

[LoraHoward]

How do you give treatment? I'm not looking for right answers, or instruction. Rather, it seems to me that treatment is a cornerstone of Christian Science practice. There are many ways to approach it, and I'm interested in other people's views, or experiences.

Thanks!

[pattyp]

You're right, Lora. I've never given the exact same treatment twice because, in each one, spiritual ideas are being linked together in a meaningful way that are specific to the situation addressed in my prayer. These ideas come straight from God, and we get them by learning to be still and listen. But there IS a basic starting point. I always begin by quieting the patient's fear -- whether the patient is me or someone else. This enables the patient to be receptive to the spiritual ideas that will help them. To me, Jesus defined treatment in a nutshell when he said, "If you continue in my word... you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." Whether one's need is met in a single treatment or many, it is always worth the effort.

[shelly]

I have to agree that I also always start Christian Science treatment by getting quiet and addressing fear. I stay quiet until I have a clear conviction that God is all that exists and that God is completely good. For me, this is starting with the first commandment. "Thou shalt have no other God's before me"

[LoraHoward]

Thanks folks.

As for myself, I find life and healing work better when I spend time each day understanding God. i frequently use the synonyms, thinking about the qualities of each one, comparing them to one another, and seeing how the errors of the day fall before them. Then I relate Man to each synonym as well. This form of treatment is never a formula and is always new. It is just a framework, and an inspiring one for me. After this, i usually take those pesky errors again and see how they just can't be. Then I might think about God some more. I recognize that the treatment is God talking, so it can't be reversed in any way.

Each day, or case, is a new one, but that is a general frame of treatment for me.

Who else is out there and what do you do when you treat?

[Merry1]

This is a very interesting thread – thanks for starting it Lora. I’ve been a Christian Scientist for a long time and, even though I’m not a practitioner, I think of myself as a “practicing” Christian Scientist (I took Class Instruction many years ago). I try to always begin my day with prayer and by working with some specific ideas from the Bible, Science and Health, and/or other Christian Science literature. Then, when I go about the business of my day, I try to keep in mind that my real job, really my only job, is to reflect the one Mind and thereby “subordinate the false testimony of the corporeal senses to the facts of Spirit,” so that I can and will see God’s “true likeness and reflection everywhere.” When I remember to look at each day, each moment, as an opportunity to see what God sees and to know what he knows, then the glory of God’s creation is revealed, and what a joy and privilege it is to witness how the always-problematic nature of material existence is healed and transformed when viewed from this spiritual perspective.

Despite this daily “practice” of Christian Science, I don’t think of myself as a practitioner because I don’t think I treat patients. Sometimes, though, I wonder how much different what I do really is from treatment. I read a blogspot once written by a practitioner named Laura Matthews which gives a pretty interesting description of Christian Science treatment (it’s still available on the web, by the way at http://lauramatthewscs.blogspot.com/2005/08/christian-science-treatment.html). As I understand it, she describes her treatments as comprised of 85% working to understand CS ideas in a new ways, ways that transform her own thought and reveal God’s creation in her own experience, 10% applying that new understanding to a particular patient in general in order to come to a clear understanding of the spiritual nature of that person, and just 5% understanding how those transforming ideas negate the specific claims of whatever the problem seems to be. What I’m doing (or, at least, what I strive to do) on a daily basis is what Laura describes as the 85%, and throughout my day I try to so the 10% by applying what I’ve learned whenever problems seem to present themselves in my experience and to recognize that I can transform my own human experience by seeing everything and everyone around me spiritually. Often this involves recognizing the spiritual nature of specific people and it is pretty cool to see how this tends to harmonize my interactions with them and how, at times, it also appears to have a harmonizing effect on their experience. The only part that I don’t do is the last part, Laura’s 5% where she specifically negates the particular claims of mortal belief, although quite honestly at times I think I do a little bit of this too.

So my question is this: Is what I’m doing really treatment after all and, if so, am I doing something unethical since those I am thinking about have, generally speaking, not asked for treatment? My teacher passed on a while ago, so I can’t ask him, and I’ve been wondering about this for quite some time, so I especially appreciate the opportunity this forum offers to get some feedback from “real” practitioners. Thanks for any thoughts you’re willing to share.

[pcook]

Dear Merry1,
I'd love to share some thoughts prompted by your post. Hope they are helpful to you.

You say you don't think of yourself as a practitioner because you don't think you treat patients. But the practice exists, with or without phone calls (or requests for teatment). Your practice is what you hae described as the way you yield all day long to what you are learning through Christian Science about God and your relationship to Him. Perhaps the only difference in what you describe and being in the full-time public practice is the way you THINK of yourself. If you opened your thought and heart to embrace the public, no doubt the phone would ring (or people would walk up and ask for help, or reach out in some other ways). I once heard another practitioner say, "Jesus' patents were not his practice; his patients were the RESULT of his practice."

I applaud and appreciate your concern about the ethics of treating someone without their requesting it, but it sounds as if you are working to spiritualize your own thought, not intruding on the thoughts of others. And that does, necessarily, result in the harmonization of one's mental atmosphere, which sometimes includes ourward changes involving others. Finally, although your teacher is not available, I encourage you to develop a relationship with an authorized Christian Science teacher who can nurture and support your "course Spiritward" and your growing sense of practice.
With love,
Pamela

[Merry1]

Wow, Pamela. Thanks. You’ve given me a lot to think about. I’m not sure what you mean when you say I should “develop a relationship” with a teacher, though. How does one go about doing something like that?

[pcook]

Dear Merry1,
Thanks for your query. I think you can trust God to show you the way to develop a relationship with a teacher. Opening your heart to the possibility is the first (and perhaps the most important) step. It's much like finding a teacher or practitioner at any point. The teachings provide for all we need to sustain and support our continued growth. You might study the Manual, and all it says about teachers, education, students -- from this viewpoint of developing a relationship with a teacher. Also, take a look at the introductory paragraph in the Christian Science Journal Directory describing the services of practitioners. Enjoy the journey!
: )
Pamela

[LoraHoward]

Dear Merry1
The idea of what the difference is between treatment and prayer, or between general and specific treatment is one i have thought about alot.
This is what I think now--First, it sounds like you are giving a general treatment, which I think is always OK ethically. For example, when Mrs. Eddy went out in public, people were just healed from being in the same area. She just wouldn't accept anything but the Truth into her consciousness, yet she did not go up to people and say,"Gee I notice you have a problem, mind if I give it a treatment?"
She also said,"never enter an impure atmosphere unless in an effort to improve it,"(which is slightly misquoted I think). Well, everywhere in the world is an impure atmosphere. And anyway, what are we purifying?--It must be our own consciousness as we cannot perceive anything outside of it.
So I think you do well.It is always fine to know what is true.
Specific treatment, the kind that requires the patients permission, is when somebody says they have a hurt something and wants it fixed. in those cases, the specific errors in the hurt persons consciousness need to be seen and addressed. Why we don't just go around doing that is that people are using all different kinds of remedies and their minds are in various stages of receptivity to truth. So, as CSers we let them come to us so as not to cause disturbance or negation of their treatment for them.
Finally, Edward Kimball said that animal magnetism is not part of the problem, it is the whole problem. What helps me is spending more than 5% on errors. I may write a list and then reverse everything on that list to find what is true. Sometimes God shows me an error to reverse firmly. I always protect each treatment by saying things like,"This treatment is God talking. CS is the Truth and nothing in this treatment can be reversed or denied by any claim of AM. I cannot be made to forget or neglect any claim that needs denying, ever. There is no relapse," and so forth.
I am going to read Laura Matthews article and thanks for the link. This is very interesting and I hope more post.

[Donna in VA]

My treatments always start with God and man in His image and likeness and go from there. One thing I have found very effective is to be clear in treatments that God does heal and that Christian Science is God-based and therefore heals with God's power. It's always good to be specific when denying the error and affirming the truth.