Article May 10, 1913 Issue

DETECTING THE COUNTERFEIT

LUCY HAYS EASTMAN.

Ever since the fruit from the "tree of knowledge" was first eaten, the world has taken upon its shoulders the responsibility of designating the right and wrong of human belief. It has never had a given standard whereby to assume such authority, however, and so, until awakened to spiritual understanding, humanity is left groping in the dark for a knowledge of Truth, the absolute good. Moreover, the fact has been entirely overlooked that right must necessarily proceed from obedience to Principle, no less certainly than the determination of an eclipse proceeds from conformity to law. Too frequently the interpretations of the Bible have been determined by the dictates of personal opinion, and they have thus misled the many. Under the direction of such influences, though every human being were to succeed in living his highest sense of right, evil would still exist as a belief in human consciousness, because each individual's concept of right differs from his neighbor's in the degree that unlike experiences, environments, teachings, and temperaments have in each case located the point of view. For example, one man believes it is wrong to work on the Sabbath day; another declares, "The better the day the better the deed;" while still another insists that every day should be Sunday. These conflicting concepts of the same day are externalized in conflicting experiences which are termed right or wrong according to individual belief; and a belief, let us remember, is never to be relied on until its truth has been demonstrated.

The mathematician can never be correct if he deviates in the slightest degree from mathematical rule; neither can he, if he ignorantly makes a mistake, no matter how accurate his work may appear to him, ever gain a satisfactory result until he perceives and corrects the error. He cannot believe whatever he may like about mathematics, and cause this science to coincide with his personal views or theories. On the contrary, he must let go of opinionated thought, and bring his understanding into parallelism with an established law. Righteousness is just as demonstrable as mathematics, but to be right, one's thought and actions must conform to the requirements of Principle. We need to find this out and replace our ignorant or dogmatic sense of moral rectitude with an obedient understanding of spiritual law, or else, no matter how sincere and honest our motives, we may, forsooth, awake to find ourselves radically wrong. Jesus said that the Holy Ghost would come to reprove the world of (its sense of) righteousness. In ignorance of these demonstrable rules of Christianity the good man often pays the penalty of unconsciously breaking spiritual law, even as a child who, in ignorance of chemical law, plays with a match and suffers the sad consequence. Furthermore, because of such unenlightened thought the most conscientious natures often struggle against fear and indecision lest they should err when they would do right. Did humanity but understand the laws of absolute good, it would realize the unreality of evil, whatever the phase it assumes, and fear it not.

Relatively speaking, the lack of a scientific understanding of good is as dangerous to the Christian as to the unchristian, for the false belief in evil would transform itself into what the apostle Paul called "an angel of light," and take advantage of such ignorance by making a good man sin without knowing it. Error often appears clothed in the garb of good, and the well-meaning are sometimes caught in the trap and led to believe wrong to be right. This phase of error is set forth by St. Paul when he says: "What I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good ...for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not." In olden times this same form of error appeared as the champion of honor, courage, yea, even love, and succeeded in inducing the supposedly God-loving Christian to kill his brother man in duel. Today it more subtly winds its illusive way in and out among the reeds of personal attachment, self-love, and self-justification, intimating that it would be an act of loyalty and love to cover up wrong, even at the expense of falsehood, and thus accumulating and disseminating a deceiving sense of good. Even now it is bartering with mortals in the name of protection and health for legislative authority, that individuals may unconsciously be deprived of their freedom in the selection of healing agencies. Thus would humanity be enticed to place life in the care of mortals who are declaring the inevitableness of death, even while they seek to cure.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

DETECTING THE COUNTERFEIT

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access