Some Comment On A Drama

SAT., JAN. 8, 1994, 3:46 PM
FARM, STUDY

Last evening, after a movie, a small meal, and an evening of bridge you watched a drama, a television story of life and death, and those who were pushing for what each considered “right.” It centered around a pregnant woman who was experiencing complications in her late stages and who was drawn into the medical care system, against her will and that of her husband.

Their religion was what is called Christian Science, of the Church of Christ, Scientist. Speaking as the Christ, I do not like to be linked with much of what is called “science,” But one of their basic premises is that this is a natural world with only natural processes, which can be studied, and any influence I may have is inconsequential and not be considered. On the other hand, if I, as the Christ, am perceived as the Supreme Scientist, the main and dominant force in human life, then I am “interested.”

Your culture’s medical care system, based in science, has the almost singular desire… and therefore responsibility… to maintain human life, no matter what. The law of your land is secular, but it does acknowledge religion and beliefs therefrom as rights of individual citizens. One unusual tenet of those in the Christian Science tradition, in comparison with other Christian groups, is the positive belief that ill health represents a loss of relationship with Me. Therefore the need is for prayer and a focus upon the Scriptures to restore that right relationship. With this accomplished, the body takes care of its illness, healing takes place, and health returns. In this positive view, there is simply no need for medical care, particularly invasive procedures. Negatively, they oppose doctors, hospitals, and all forms of physical treatment, on the premise that these lead Christians away from the truth of My involvement and My capacities to heal… away from the truth that all apparent illness is just an indication of spiritual weakness and need.

The drama portrayed the civil law as saying that even though the mother and father opposed the medical treatment to save the baby’s life, that unborn child had the right be born alive that superceded the parent’s religious faith. So their faith was denied as a right, and the baby was deliver by C section, alive and well.

Next came further complications with the mother, a stroke, resulting in coma… and therefore the medical need to provide her with food and water intravenously. While food and water are not, as normally provided, considered medical care, just a necessity for continuing health and life, when provided by needle in a hospital this becomes medical treatment. Here the law shifts to the right to believe as you choose, so that medical care cannot be forced upon a person who does not “believe in it.”

So what are My comments on such a drama, with the law both rejecting and upholding a particular Christian belief? One of My main premises, which you recognized during the story, is that death is not the major tragedy that your secular culture considers it to be. Since your medical care system has various means to sustain life and postpone death it has come up with the interpretation that it should do so in every instance, with virtually no exceptions. This translates into the perception that death is a failure, and death is the worst thing that can happen.

As you know, I see death as just a transition, from incarnated to fully spiritual life. It really makes very little difference, in your whole spiritual journey, when you die or under what conditions. What matters is how you live the life you have, and how close you come to Me in it. The baby whose life was presumably saved, now has a life ahead. But Baby Nick only had a bit over a year… and he lived it well, as he should have.