Church of Religious Science?

[Bloodblister Bob]

My wife has started going to the Church of Religious Science. I've skimmed a few of their publications, and it just seems like warmed-over "The Power of Positive Thinking" to me. They seem to revere some guy named Ernest Holmes.

Is this outfit weird? Should I be concerned about my wife? BTW, I profess no religion or faith.

[Canuckistanian]

1. This guy, Ernest Holmes..

Does he look like this?

[hvn_nbr_2]

11. As a Religious Scientist, I find that highly....fun

I've always kind of liked Bob. I can't find a picture of Ernest Holmes now, but if I remember correctly, he was significantly more chubby than Bob, less attractive and dynamic-looking. The hair was probably about right (a generational look, I'd say; my dad's hair looked like that too) but I think Holmes's hairline was more receding. Don't remember if he smoked a pipe; wouldn't surprise me either way, although I'd bet that if he were alive today with today's knowledge of smoking and health, he wouldn't smoke. Oh, I also suspect he'd get a chuckle out of your post.

[kwassa]

16. Ernest Holmes looks like this

I was a member for about five years until I moved. Nothing remotely cultlike about it. Very good comments from the other members here.

[The River]

2. See My Sig

[Ian David]

3. Dude, this is a cult...

Any religious group that "reveres" an individual is more likely than not a cult.



# Year Founded: In 1927 the Institute of Religious Science and School of Philosophy was founded by Ernest Holmes. This institute was the foundation of what would become the United Church of Religious Science.

# History: Ernest Holmes was born into a large, lower class family in rural Maine, headed by parents who emphasized religion in the family's life. Due to financial hardship, none of the boys recieved a high level of education. Holmes moved to Boston in his early twenties, where he read extensively and studied public speaking at a school affiliated with the New Thought Movement. He concentrated especially on the works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Mary Baker Eddy (the founder of Church of Christ, Scientist), W.W. Atkinson, Ralph Waldo Trine, and Christian D. Larson, all key figures in the development of New Thought ideology (Melton, 1996:637).

<snip>

In 1912 Ernest Holmes moved to California, where his brother Fenwicke was a Congregational Minister. It was at this time that he became familiar with the work of Thomas Troward, a New Thought practitioner whose revolutionary ideas about the mind were the primary influence of Holmes' beliefs, which were later synthesized into Religious Science. More specifically, Troward interpreted New Thought ideas in a less religious manner, leading to his assertion that "livingness is ultimately to be measured by its intelligence" (Braden: 421). His focus on cosmic intelligence, science, conscious and subconsciousness, and his form of synergy (source:http://www.new-thought.org/trowd.html) are all departures from mainstream New Thought ideas.

More:
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/ucrs.html

Dude, steer clear of this stuff.

I don't have time to get into it. I have to tend to my family right now.

[demosincebirth]

5. I agree, its a cult.

[Maat]

10. It is not a cult.

And you would not like me calling your belief system a cult.

See my other post.

[Maat]

8. To say that it is a cult is a total falsehood and unbelievably offensive.

We are not Christian Scientists (not that they are a cult); we go to doctors the same as anyone else.

No one tells me with whom to associate (who to hang around with). No one tells me what to think or what to say. No one tries to isolate me. Free thinking is encouraged.

[Ian David]

15. Good for you. n/t

[Maat]

21. Thank you (n/t).

[Ian David]

36. To be fair, I may or may not have been hasty in my assessment

I was being pressured to leave the keyboard at home before I could do much research into it. (I did point out in my post that I was doing a "rush job" of sorts). I'm sorry to have left it up to someone else to "do my homework" for me.

But, left with two choices:

1) Let it go and risk the chance of someone getting sucked into a dangerous cult.

2) Be too hasty and possibly slander what might be a legitimate group.

Wrongly or rightly, I chose option #2 since I also figured:

a) If I am wrong, someone will tell me and set the record straight for everyone else. (I am, after all, wrong 1/12 of the time).
b) If I am right, someone could end up castrated waiting for a comet.

I chose to risk making people mad at me and insulting the innocent rather than risk a small part in a group suicide, knowing that the well-informed folks at DU wouldn't be shy about setting the record straight.


Normally, I'm more careful about that sort of thing, but if I didn't leave the computer I risked castration here at home.

I apologize if I insulted anyone.

I'm just glad we all get to go to bed tonight with our testicles intact.

[Maat]

38. HeeHee.

I usually enjoy your posts, IanDB1.

And maybe next time I can be calmer. Sorry.

And, I can understand hurrying.

Next time, I suggest, "What's up? I'm concerned. Anyone have some info.?"

You're cool.

And, remember, like Unitarian-Universalists, Religious Scientists and members of the United Church of Christ congregations are, more often than not, progressives and valuable allies to the democratic-progressive-liberal movement. We are the only place that is truly welcoming and affirming of all couples in my Temecula Valley (a very conservative area of Southern California)(many couples attend, as well as a healthy amount of singles).

My pastor is VERY supportive of my work - I'm vice president of the local chapter of PFLAG (Parents, Family, Friends of Lesbians and Gays).

Education is a wonderful thing; I learn much every time I log on to DU.

Take care!

(P.S. And I'm open to little green men AND women from Venus - HeeHee - my Pastafarian spouse and I discuss what I call StarGateIsm - a new belief system all the time; he loves some of the theories on his favorite show, Stargate.)

[MemphisTiger]

17. That's not completely true...

every denomination "reveres" the founder of it. Like John Wesley for Methodist or John Calvin for Baptists. They do NOT worship the man, but give him a great deal of respect.

[Maat]

23. Well, yes, I respect Holmes quite a bit.

I respect John Murtha quite a bit.

What they say makes sense to me ..

But I don't state that either are any more God-like or devine than I.

[MemphisTiger]

27. Right

that was my point.

[Maat]

39. Exactly (n/t)!

[funflower]

37. Cults revere living individuals who want to take over your life. This guy

is dead. A lot of major religions revere a dead person (Jesus, Abraham, Muhammed for starters).

[tulsakatz]

4. no, it's not a cult.........

....at least not in the usual meaning of the word.

I've belonged to Religious Science churches for a large part of my life. I first discovered this church because my roommate in College was a member when I went to school in Dallas. I was kind of a hippy back then and it was kind of a hippy kind of religion.

They not only focus on Christianity but other religions as well. And it's true, a lot of their teachings come from the writings of Ernest Holmes. I've also heard that it's similar to Unity Church too.

Actually when I was younger, I liked the church better because there was less emphasis on Christianity. It seems like recently, there has been too much tendency to try to be 'Christian', to try to fit in with the other religions. Somehow, that rubs me the wrong way.....it must be the hippy in me. The way I used to be a non conformist.

They used to have several websites too. Try doing a search for Religious Science or Science of Mind (that's the name of Holmes' textbook).

Let me put it this way, it's no more of a cult than Christianity is.
In fact, in many ways, I think it's better than Christianity. You won't ever find a revival or someone who is trying to convert someone to Religious Science. If you choose to join, they will gladly accept you but I don't believe they would try to purposely convert you.

[Maat]

9. Thanks for the reply - because I'm a Religious Scientist also.

My particular church does not emphasize or mention Christianity, save an occasional quote.

We refer to Jesus as "Jesus of Nazareth," not as "Jesus Christ."

We explore other spiritualities to our hearts content.

Maybe those who call it a cult can ONE way it resembles a cult.

And we don't revere Ernest Holmes. We can't, for we believe that everyone is an equal and magnificent God-person, if you will.

I have NEVER tried to convert anyone, nor have they tried to convert me.

[tulsakatz]

12. that's true..........

they do study the writings of Ernest Holmes but then they also study many religions too!! That's one of the things I've always loved about it!!

I think I've learned more about different religions by being in Religious Science than any traditional Christian religion.

And they also don't believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. And yes, they also study the Bible as well as other religions. We believe that Jesus is the son of God, as are we all. And we believe that each person is capable of creating miracles in their lives.

I live in the Bible belt and many people here (myself included) don't like it when people try to push their religion onto us. That's one thing Religious Science would never do. I think it's a great religion!

You're welcome for the comment. To say it's a cult, is a mistake in my opinion.

[Maat]

19. You're right.

Take care!

[hvn_nbr_2]

6. It's not a cult and they absolutely do not revere Ernest Holmes

Ernest Holmes was the founder and wrote the primary books they use for teaching, but they absolutely do not see him as any more divine than you or me. He's just the founder and a (not the) teacher.

The OP's view that it's warmed-over power of positive thinking is probably a reasonably accurate view of it for someone who doesn't buy the teachings. A really simple overview of the teachings would be: 1. There is a power for good in the universe and you can use it. 2. Change you thinking, change your life.

While Mary Baker Eddy was one of Holmes's influences and Religious Science does believe in the power of spiritual healing, they do not, repeat NOT reject conventional medical care.

"Weird" is in the eye of the beholder, so I can't answer that part. Certainly some people would think it's weird. Fundamentalists think they're evil. You don't need to worry about your wife unless it would disturb you if positive thinking has beneficial effects for her.

BTW, I know this stuff because I was happily a member of a Religious Science congregation for about 8 years at one time. When I moved, I just never felt connected to any of the congregations in the new place, so I drifted away. No one comes after you to badger or threaten or any cult-like stuff like that. People join and leave all the time.

[tulsakatz]

13. excellent comment!!

This paragraph says it all:


The OP's view that it's warmed-over power of positive thinking is probably a reasonably accurate view of it for someone who doesn't buy the teachings. A really simple overview of the teachings would be: 1. There is a power for good in the universe and you can use it. 2. Change you thinking, change your life.


That's it in a nutshell!!

I've been the same way about going to church. I've drifted in and out of that church for most of my life. I attended church for awhile and then I drifted away. Then I came back and now I have an unusual work schedule so I haven't been to church for awhile.

And I believe Christian Science is the one that doesn't believe in going to a doctor. Religious Science not only studies other religions but we also have an appreciation for science and the benefit it adds to our lives.

[Bloodblister Bob]

18. "Change your thinking, change your life."... they need church for this?

"The OP's view that it's warmed-over power of positive thinking is probably a reasonably accurate view of it for someone who doesn't buy the teachings. A really simple overview of the teachings would be: 1. There is a power for good in the universe and you can use it. 2. Change your thinking, change your life."

The Religious Science teachings you cite are axioms that we have all grown up with, so it's not a question of me "buying" them. I just don't understand why Religious Scientists have to go to church and rehash them every week.

I guess the "going to chuch" exercise itself must have some appeal that I don't get. But, I have to admit that I'm not very good at understanding why most people do what they do, so there you go.

I appreciate the feedback from all.

[Maat]

24. I think that what I'm trying to say is that there is much to gain by going

... and no harm (except that one could be doing someone else that a family member or friend feels is more valuable).

Think of it as a fellowship of people who want to meditate, make goals and take steps to achieve them.

My Pastafarian husband ( www.venganza.org ) loves me going, because I tend to get negative and be a worrier. Going to C.R.S. encourages me to take responsibility, think about any subconcious thoughts that I have that might impede me in reaching my goal and take steps to get rid of them.

Take care!

[Bloodblister Bob]

26. I think meditating, getting right, making goals, etc....

...is necessarily a solitary experience. For me, going to a "church" interjects social distractions and tensions which distract from or even negate the process.

[Maat]

32. I can relate to your concern.

It is not like that in CRS.

The only one interrupting the meditations is my 9-year-old, who may not have felt like going with the tweeners that day (but that's another story)(we've had to make an agreement about sitting still and not poking while Mommy is meditating).

Yes, I do socialize, but after the service. My pastor tends to give a few minutes to greet the neighbor, but then it's back to thinking about whatever you chose in a meditation, or listening to her talks.

No tension there, whatsoever. Try it.

I feel at peace there.

Sometimes, I just let some negativity go.

No pressure, though. Dr. Wayne Dyer is a good example of a New-Thoughter (that's another term for us).

I tell my husband, due to my own nature, Tony Robbins is too much for me. And there aren't any "Tonies" in my church. Too manic. I like my energy level on a nice and even keel.

When you get to the liberal side of the spectrum, though, such as UU, CRS, or UCC (United Church of Christ), you notice that each congregation has a different flavor. One might like a UU or CRS church in one local, but not the one in another. So, one has to try each one.

Even my Pastafarian husband likes Reverend P. She is an extrovert, with a great voice and comedy routine. In what other service can you listen to a good joke?

Feel free to PM me if I can help by articulating my own personal experience.

The only problem I see is someone going, and maybe getting really goal-oriented, and a bit overenthusiastic (forgetting the patience part), and that might impact the family. My hubby has to help me frame and make a concrete-step list sometimes. I was definitely send to this life to learn 'patience.'

We also do not believe in heaven and hell, and some like that idea.

[tulsakatz]

29. actually you don't have to go to church...........

.....another interesting thing about this religion is the fact that you can learn from all kinds of experiences! And you don't have to go to church to be religious or spiritual. For instance you can be in touch with God just by being in touch with nature.

It's not necessary to go to church or study the material but I think if you do that, it offers guidance and can, more easily, help you change your life by influencing your outlook and frame of mind.

[Maat]

7. Nope.

I'm a proud Religious Scientist.

And my pastor is remarkably well-grounded.

Go to www.rsintl.org and read the frequently-asked questions.

I have a Bachelor's in Business, a Master's in Psychology, and a law doctorate. I was a social worker for seven years. I have been participating in the church for two years, and haven't seen anything that has concerned me. It has helped my outlook and my attitude immensely.

We are universalists, and honor all paths; we encourage independent thinking. We are welcoming and affirming. We don't look to an external punishing God; rather the universal spirit is within us. We believe we are all a piece of God, if you will, and each of us experiences for God/Spirit/The-Flying-Spaghetti-Monster. We believe in evolution.

Singles are welcome. Couples (same-sex, hetero, married, non-married) are welcome. Kids are welcome. Not an offensive word is said to anyone. We don't have a 'holy book' that dictates that we disapprove of anyone.

Contrast that with my hardright Conservative religious relatives of a certain denomination I won't name; the only people they hang around with is others that go to the same church. They are told what to think: e.g. that homosexuality is a sin, and that gays should go to a 'pastoral counseling' program to change their orientation.

And don't let our name for our prayer frighten you. It is called Spiritual Mind Treatment. It is simply ... affirmative prayer (positive thinking, stating your goals).

[tulsakatz]

14. if there were one religion that would be perfect for liberals, this is it.

....I never thought of it that way before but they do value all of the things that liberals value!

I was raised Baptist and once I found this religion, I knew I would never go back!! Comparing Baptist to Religious Science would be like comparing Bush to JFK!! There is just no comparison for me..........

[Maat]

20. Correct again!

My pastor always says, "We are a healing church."

We have people who joke that they are "recovering Catholics" there.

We have people who joke that they are "recovering Southern Baptists" there.

They aren't trying to insult their former churches. They are just saying they gave up guilt and notions of God punishing someone for a sin.

[hvn_nbr_2]

22. Actually it's a good religion for liberals or "real" conservatives

The "Change your thinking, change your life" aspect fits well with conservative ideals about self-reliance, and there is a balance between self-reliance and compassion for others. At the church I attended for years, in conservative Orange County, there were liberals and conservatives, and I didn't know the politics of most of the people there.

The minister once addressed that subject in a sermon because someone had really gone off on her for, as the complaining woman saw it, dissing the woman's political party's views. It turned out that the minister was actually in the same party as the complaining woman. The minister never told us which party she belonged to and I could never come to a conclusion for myself which she was.

[Maat]

25. Yes, believe or not, we have some conservatives in ours.

I tend to hang out with the more universalist-open-minded types. Strangely enough, they sit on the left, and we sit on the right!

[Bloodblister Bob]

28. How does Religious Science differ from Unitarian Universalism?

I used to hang out at a UU church back in the 80s, but purely for social reasons. The services and the people were attractive, inoffensive, and usually entertaining.

They sometimes tended to be too far to the left for me, though. I mean, who really wants to sit through an hour of some guy playing old Wobbly songs on the banjo?

[Maat]

30. I have a hard time telling the difference.

Well, first of all, the C.R.S. pastor will mention God. Mine (a female - I like an equal-opportunity church) tells the teenagers - "Call Spirit what you want - the Universal Consciousness, the Cosmic Muffin, whatever." I enjoy "Spirit;" my hubby likes "the Unimind." That one always cracks me up - "right on," but funny.

We sing a song, with the words, "Our thoughts are prayers, and we are always praying." So, we believe positive thoughts are important; we believe you can defeat a negative subconscious thought, if you will, by consciously repeating a positive one to yourself.

When I go to my U.U. church, the focus is upon social activism. C.R.S. is more broad and lets the individual congregant determine the goal. MINE happens to be social activism.

The musicians at my C.R.S. happen to be professionals; my U.U. church tends to have congregants play.

The U.U. Sunday school teaches the kids about every religion in class; a C.R.S. Sunday school would teach the overall philosoply about taking control of your thoughts - might do a meditation, for example.

In C.R.S., we tend to meet as clubs when exploring other spiritualities - I go to Native American drumming once per month, for example. I guess that is the same with my UU church.

I think that my UU church pastor speaks of social concerns in her sermon; my CRS pastor speaks of the overall philosophy of availing yourself of the Universal Power (within and without)- maybe to achieve your goal of improving society.

Both my CRS and UU pastors are pro-gay-rights, progressives, peaceniks (like myself) and feminists.

Atheists and agnostics would feel VERY comfortable in UU, although my hubby, a Pastafarian (virutal-atheist with a sense of humor), feels quite comfortable in CRS, putting in the term 'Universal Consciousness' for God. My husband is really open-minded and is a Stargate-ologist, and finds the Unimind concept cute.

I guess it is like different flavors of ice cream - different traditions/customs, and I like both.

I feel MOST comfortable taking my 9-year-old to either church, because I know that she will learn love, compassion, an appreciation for peace, and to consciously respect others. And I feel joy in that - as opposed to letting her go to a hardright Southern Baptist church with her quirky relatives.

Hope this helps.

I visit the UU church several times per year.

[kwassa]

31. Completely different religions, from different sources

Church of Religious Science is derived from the New Thought movement of the late 1800s, and Unitarianism/Universalism essentially is an offshoot of earlier Congregational churches in the 1830s.

The concept of God is still quite alive in Religious Science, which uses the trinity as well in the concepts of Body, Soul and Spirit. It is very oriented to active prayer. UU has no common religious expression, by comparison, a more secular and less-defined denomination. I have been a member of both denominations.

[Maat]

33. I think that you 'hit the nail on the head,' Kwassa.

My particular pastor does not talk about the trinity much.

I think that what you mean, Kwassa, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the church does not insist on believing in the Trinity, or dividing Spirit; on the other hand, we do talk about the thinking's impact on the body. One could define that in terms of subconscious/conscious thought, or whatever.

I kind of miss the CRS meditation, and references to accessing the Universal Power/Consciousness, when I am in UU. I miss the talks on social activism when I am in CRS.

So, I call myself a Religious Scientist primarily; I'm UU in philosophy in that I really like participating in food drives, peace marches, PFLAG and Planned Parenthood educational meetings (being community-oriented), and my local Democracy for America, and I enjoy exploring all spiritual paths.


I hope I'm expressing that in a way that sort of makes sense.

[kwassa]

34. I go to church to contemplate the divine

I can do social action anywhere.

I was involved in a homeless feeding project while at Religious Science, too. They can be activist. It is not the point of going to church, not for me.

The most valuble thing I got from them was learning a means of prayer that I think is pretty good. It also introduced me to what is essentially Christian mysticism, also very interesting.

I am also increasingly active in local Democratic politics. I like to keep the two realms separate, though.

[Maat]

35. Again, I agree.

Let me put it this way. My CRS congregation could be more active on the social activist front, but my pastor believes in honoring the various community orientations (so-to-speak) of her church members. I respect her for that.

She is very conscientious about remaining nonpartisan, apolitical, and open-minded - while she is in church.

I believe you hit the nail on the head as to why I now go to CRS 7/8 times in a two-month period. I decided I like the CRS traditions better, references to the Divine, the method of prayer, the mystical slant, and the recitation of our basic principles each time (it centers me)(for non-CRS-ers, the principles focus on belief that one can use the power in the Universe to aid in achieving one's goals).

I am involved in PFLAG (Parents, Family Friends of Lesbians and Gays - my 'adopted' sister is a lesbian in a committed relationship), Democracy for America, a local Congressional campaign, a group of progressive, spiritual women, and the local peace/anti-discrimination/peaceful-coexisting movement. So, that scratches my activist itch, so-to-speak. So, I relate to that part of what you are saying.

My kid was the deciding factor; she has a friend at the CRS church, and told me that the CRS church was going to be our main church.

I understand that it is a good idea to keep the realms separate. I was on the fence about that; like I said, my kid's input was the deciding factor (it just happened that way).

It sure is nice to have you as a DU friend.

We are putting up a website in a couple of months on the spiritual women. I will be sure to send you a link.

On edit:
I think that we are just identifying factors that need to be taken into consideration in determining which is the best spiritual gathering for a particular person.

[Maat]

40. We cover different topics each week.

One of my recent favorites was my pastor talking about how evolution IS an example of intelligent design!