New Thought Responds to COVID-19

BY HARV BISHOP

This week the shit got real.

Along with the unprecedented suspending of major league basketball games, shuttering the lights of Broadway, and closing hundreds of college campuses, churches of all denominations from New Thought to Catholic, are making the tough decision to cancel in-person services and go online.

 

This move did not come without controversy. In the New Thought community there is a divide between those that see the moves as protecting the most vulnerable in our community and those who see it as turning away from cherished principles and giving into fear.

A world-wide pandemic is bringing new clarity to New Thought adherents about their beliefs and practices. Should the churches shutter or is caution and attempting to limit the spread of COVID-19 in the physical world accepting that disease is more powerful than our consciousness that is believed to create consensus reality? In other words, does turning our focus from a physical effect (COVID-19) that has no ultimate spiritual reality make things better? And, stated in the opposite way, does focusing on the negative reinforce and recreate unwanted circumstances?

I was curious what people thought about having services online versus on site and posted the question on Facebook last week. I was floored by 115 and counting responses. These thoughtful responses mirrored two ways of thinking about New Thought beliefs.

1) With the right belief nothing in the physical world can harm us because our consciousness creates the physical world.

2) With consciousness comes wisdom and right action. For example, the wisdom not to walk into a burning building if you aren’t a trained fireman.

A handful of people responded that consciousness trumps disease and therefore precautions such as cancelling church and avoiding crowds was not necessary. The majority said their consciousness is leading them to cancel church to protect the most vulnerable.

I’m excerpting a sampling of the Facebook comments below. I won’t weigh in order to give each side its voice.

Religious Science minister Rev. David Alexander of Georgia said, “Treat (pray), move your feet, and wash your hands…. I don’t see anything but principle in these steps.” His church will go online if requested to do so by local health officials.

“As the old Arab saying goes, trust Allah and tie up the camels,” wrote Rev. Richard Kent Mathews of a Unity Church in Portland Oregon. “Spirit works through faith in medicine and prevention as well as mind treatment.”

Unity minster Dale Blackford spoke for the other perspective: “Cracks me up, the comments on the reality of the disease and the problems they present as if that’s the truth. Especially coming from New Thought sources. The reality is that we are the vessels of that which dissolves every and all forms of dis-ease, but we believe we are not. We believe we are victims to the world. I get that from this belief we find it rational to try and ‘protect’ ourselves. That’s OK. But to make it any other observation other than that we are still attached to our illusions, refusing and (because of beliefs) unable to choose release from the illusion of disease is absurd. I am the Light of the World. Just because I choose to act like a victim to it, doesn’t make it Reality.”

“Abandoning principles,” another respondent offered about service cancellations. “Pure and simple.”

“We don’t bypass the condition and say it doesn’t exist,” wrote Savannah Noel Riker, assistant minister at a Religious Science church Seattle. “We turn our energy away from it to the truth denying its power over us. If our church was on fire, we would call the fire department. We wouldn’t all be standing around hoping that our prayers for wholeness (would make) the condition different… We don’t bury our heads in the sand or… say that our thought will pray it away as we affirm perfect health. It is a both/and. I don’t feel it’s a contradiction.”

“On any average Sunday I would hear one congregant say to another who had a cold, ‘What are you holding in consciousness that brought on this cold?’ This is spiritual malpractice,” wrote Scott DeMarco, a Divine Science minister.

“Even if the minister and practitioners may be holding a consciousness of whole health, there might be folks who are not,” offered Religious Science minister Patrick Soran of Denver.

Some ministers were reluctant to close services noting that people needed community and support, not isolation. Many churches planned to move services online. Others said they would wait for guidance from local governing authorities. One respondent suggested that smaller less prosperous churches had a financial incentive to remain open. Others said it was up to individual choice–by ministers or adherents. Rev. Ted Schneider of Unity regarded it as a moral imperative given the older, vulnerable congregants at New Thought churches: “As New Thought Centers have an older population and have family that is older, services with the hugging and singing and fellowship increase the chances of spreading a life-threatening disease to at-risk people.”

Religious Science minister Dr. Jim Lockard, who blogs at Spiritual Evolutionary, wrote “I would say that if you have developed a consciousness which has consistently demonstrated at a level of mastery in healing yourself and others (who have not developed to that level), so that there is no doubt in your mind that no one could spread or contract an infection of any kind in your presence, then go ahead and meet. Otherwise, take reasonable and prudent measures to limit such contact.”

“Prayer is a supplement, not a substitute for right action,” wrote Rev. Arthur Chang of Founders Center for Spiritual Living in Los Angeles (the church founded by Dr. Ernest Holmes).  “When you are hungry you don’t just pray, you eat. Your body won’t keep healthy without exercise or movement. You don’t just imagine yourself at your destination, you get in your car and drive there. There is a Law of Right Action, not just Right Thinking. This is not an abandonment of Principles, we are physical beings. We do brush our teeth and bathe. Life must go from thought to thing.”

“Does one say, ‘I believe in Principle so I will have unprotected sex because I know I will not/ cannot contract HIV or other STDs?,’ ” asked Religious Science minister Raymont Anderson, co-host of Big Universe on Unity Radio.  “Does one stay in their home when a blazing brush fire or raging flood is rapidly approaching their home?”

“Principle is not in defiance or opposition to best practice public health knowledge,” wrote Religious Science practitioner Rebecca Hiraoka.  “We are the “science” of mind. Science is deeply baked into our practice and I hope we deeply embrace this aspect of God. I hope we can be leaders in this regard. I appreciate this question intellectually, but I have to say I worry about even entertaining this paradigm because I believe it is deeply harmful to in any way equate smart, grounded, preemptive steps towards wellness with panic. They are different things. Also, fear is okay. It’s a natural human emotion that can guide us to sources of wisdom (expert recommendations). Taking steps for wellness is relating to fear and knowledge in a life-giving way. Let us affirm that and lift each other up in these brave steps.”

“If being prudent isn’t acting from principles,” offered Religious Science minister Masando Hiraoka of Mile Hi Church near Denver, “I probably need some new ones.”