Proclaim your innocence
Imagine this scenario: You’re a law-abiding citizen; you have a job, pay your taxes, help your friends, and live a productive life. One day, a couple of police officers come to your door and accuse you of robbing a bank, placing you under arrest. It’s clear to you a mistake has been made. What is your response? Do you admit guilt? Meekly submit to the arrest and spend the next ten years in jail? Not likely. Instead, you would proclaim your innocence, protest the injustice, call a lawyer, and fight for your right to be free.
What if the police claimed to have evidence of your guilt, such as witnesses and camera footage? Would you begin to wonder if you actually had robbed a bank? Or would you still know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you had committed no crime? It’s not inconceivable to think that you might begin to question your own innocence. Suspects have been known to confess to crimes they didn’t commit when under intense interrogation.
These are questions worth considering because, while it’s unlikely we’ll ever be accused of robbing a bank, subtle mental suggestions often accuse us of other things—like having a temper, being prone to illness, failing at relationships, getting old. When we encounter discord, it’s like we’re being accused of being something other than what we really are.
What are we really? The first book of the Bible describes man as created in the image of God, after His likeness (see Genesis 1:26 ). That’s a pretty clear declaration of man’s innocence. This creation account concludes by saying that “God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good” (Genesis 1:31 ). Nothing to feel guilty about there. So why are we sometimes reluctant to insist on our innocence in the face of accusations of illness or failure? Instead we often end up agreeing with the accusations and pleading guilty. The human mind sometimes tries to explain, excuse, or understand discord rather than to refute it.
In her book Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of Christian Science, uses a similar analogy in an allegory about a man on trial for having “committed liver-complaint” (see pp. 430–442 ). In the story, a number of witnesses take the stand and the evidence piles up that this man is indeed guilty of being diseased. Finally, Christian Science arrives on the scene to defend the prisoner. Christian Science vigorously argues on behalf of the man and points out the falsity of the witnesses against him. The jury finds the prisoner not guilty, and he rises up free of disease.
Each of us is just as innocent as the man in the allegory, and each of us has access to the vigorous defense offered by Christian Science in accord with the promise of Christ-healing illustrated in the Bible. We will be able to aid in our defense to the extent that we are certain of our innocence.
Remember the earlier scenario? If you were accused of robbing a bank, you wouldn’t, and shouldn’t for one second, wonder about your innocence. You would know you were innocent. We can be just as certain of our spiritual innocence when we face accusations of imperfection or sickness. Why? Because the spiritual theme of the Bible is a declaration of man’s innate innocence. Many healers in the Bible, Christ Jesus in particular, didn’t accept the evidence of disease or lack or an innate sinful nature or death. They overturned it, proving it invalid.
Consider Jesus’ healing of the man who was born blind (see John 9). Jesus’ own disciples ask for an explanation for the man’s blindness. They want to know who sinned—the man or his parents. Notice the problem with that question? It assumes guilt. It operates from the premise that the man is blind, has always been blind, will continue to be blind, and therefore, there must be a cause for it. Jesus isn’t buying it. He recognizes the mistaken premise. His response in verse three is: “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.” Jesus then proceeds to heal the man.
Mrs. Eddy recommends we take the same approach: “When the body is supposed to say, ‘I am sick,’ never plead guilty. Since matter cannot talk, it must be mortal mind which speaks; therefore meet the intimation with a protest. If you say, ‘I am sick,’ you plead guilty. Then your adversary will deliver you to the judge (mortal mind), and the judge will sentence you” (Science and Health, p. 391 ).
One might wonder who or what is doing the accusing. Mrs. Eddy uses the word adversary in the previous passage. The Apostle Paul, in the Bible, uses the phrase “carnal mind,” describing it as being “enmity against God” and “not subject to the law of God” (Romans 8:7 ). Whatever the terminology, the suggestion that man is guilty is clearly not from God and, therefore, lacks authority, validity, even reality.
The human mind sometimes tries to explain, excuse, or understand discord rather than to refute it.
Several years ago, I faced a very painful internal condition, one that often kept me up at night. I had help praying about the problem from my husband and a dedicated Christian Science practitioner, and there were times when I felt free from the pain, but the condition continued for some time. The pain sometimes made it hard for me to pray. It could be likened to a relentless accusation that I was guilty of several crimes—of being a mortal, of being subject to material organization, of experiencing sensation in matter. At the time, I wasn’t always certain how effective my prayers were, but I stuck with it. I had experienced and witnessed enough significant healings in my life to know that the Christ, which presents the truth of man’s innocence, would free me.
I could have sought out medical means, but taking that path didn’t feel like the right option for me. I sensed it would be useful to take a stand and not plead guilty to being susceptible to illness. I very much knew it was natural to expect spiritual healing that would prove I was, indeed, spiritual, innocent, in spite of the “cloud of witnesses” (Hebrews 12:1 ) saying otherwise. It was two years until the healing was complete, but at some point during this “trial” I realized the “accuser,” mortal mind, was backing off. The pain and fear subsided, and I felt relief. The truth of my innocence was melting away the underlying lie that I was a mortal. Each day I was a little better than the day before until at last I was completely free. I hadn’t been able to ride my bike during this time (a favorite activity of mine), and I knew the healing was complete when I was back on my bike every weekend. This experience taught me a lot about maintaining my innocence and never pleading guilty or agreeing with a false accusation.
The next time you’re mistakenly accused of the “crime” of being less than the flawless expression of God, don’t admit guilt and don’t begin to wonder if the accusation is true; hold fast to your conviction that you are innocent. Side with the law of God and continue to side with it. Truth is your defense and will restore justice to the case.
