_joe vitale - which metaphysic treatment works best

8/16/2019 _Joe Vitale - Which Metaphysic Treatment Works Best

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/joe-vitale-which-metaphysic-treatment-works-best 1/28

WHAT TREATMENT METHOD WORKS BEST?

by

Joe Vitale

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Master of Metaphysical Science in theDepartment of Graduate Studies of the University of Metaphysics

December 3, 2002

DATE



Department of Graduate Studies

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

M.Msc. THESIS

This is to certify that the M.Msc. thesis of

Joe Vitale

has been approved by the Examining Committee for the

thesis requirements for the Master of Metaphysical Science

degree of the University of Metaphysics.

Thesis Committee: ___________________________Thesis Supervisor

___________________________Member

___________________________Member



TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………4

Review of Literature ……………………………………………………………….5

Methods …………………………………………………………………………….7

Results………………………………………………………………………………9

Discussion ………………………………………………………………………….24

Summary and Conclusion…………………………………………………………..25

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………...27



WHAT TREATMENT METHOD WORKS BEST? – Vitale –

Introduction

I’m frustrated.

I want to know what treatment method works best. I’m confused by the catalog of

treatments I can find offered in any “new age” yellow pages directory. I am in pain and

want out---but I have no idea which way to go to find the light.

That’s the plight of most people who seek treatment these days, including me. I

can look around and find people who offer to do treatments that involve taping my eyes

while I repeat mantras. I can also do research and find historical documents about

treatment methods. Well, which is right---the old or the new?

Now that metaphysics is very mainstream, being accepted by numerous people all

over the world and particularly here in America, there is the added problem of which

method of treatment works best.

In other words, with the rise of metaphysics has come different schools of

metaphysics, each promoting their own unique method of treatment, or way to help

people heal and grow. While the more treatment methods the merrier may be a good

slogan, is it true? Are all treatment methods created equal? If not, which treatment

method is best? Which does the most good? Which does the most (if any) harm?

If the goal of metaphysics is to help people realize their inner divinity and heal

themselves quickly, wouldn’t the fastest, most direct route to treatment be the wisest

choice? If so, what is that method?

In short, what treatment method works best?

This thesis will attempt to answer these very questions.




Review of Literature

I have devoured books old and new to understand treatment methods. Most of the

time I’ve been left confused.

For example, if I look at early books on treatment, such as Rawson’s 1912 book,

titled Treatment, and then look at a recent book on treatment, such as Joseph Murphy’s

brand-new Think Yourself to Health, Wealth, and Happiness, I find little in comparison.

While both speak about treatment, they seem to be speaking different languages.

I didn’t stop there, of course. I cross-referenced old and new books to find

answers to my key questions. All of this will become clear in this thesis. For now, here

are some of my key resources:

There are two nice but very skimpy booklets on treatment in print, one by Jody

Carter called What Is Treatment?, and the other by Raymond Charles Barker called

Treatment. There are also in-print books containing material on the subject of treatment,

mostly essays by Joseph Murphy, Raymond Charles Barker, Emmet Fox, and Ernest

Holmes, that are too long to list here. Unfortunately, there is no one definitive full-length

book titled “Treatment---The Guaranteed Method.” (Actually, there is a book called

Treatment by F. L. Rawson from 1912, that Ernest Holmes once suggested might be a

definitive study of the subject, but it is now nearly one hundred years old.)

Since there are so few books in print on treatment, I decided to look elsewhere.

When I asked an out-of-print bookstore in Oregon to compile a list of all their books

covering the subject of “treatment,” they returned seven long pages of titles. Very few

books are focused solely on just treatment, while a few others briefly discuss treatment




within their pages. By far, most books simply offer a wide variety of information on a

wide variety of treatment methods---from crystals to mind science to hands-on healing to

hands-off healing---the list goes on and on. In fact, I spent hundreds of dollars on these

books to help myself answer the question of this thesis.

There are good books that discuss treatment, such as Mind Surgery by Daniel

Boone Herring (1931), The Mirror of Your Mind by Orrin Moen (1961) and How to Give

Treatments Personal and Absent by F.W. Sears (1913), that are long out of print.

In addition, there are several biographies about the founders of metaphysical

schools and their own treatment methods, from Powerful Is The Light by Hazel Deane

(1945) (about Nona Brooks) to the recent colossal definitive biography, Mary Baker

Eddy, by Gillian Gill (1998).

The list doesn’t stop there. There are also fine writings on treatment in collections

of essays, such as Mind Remakes Your World, edited by Ernest Holmes (1941). And

there are short explanations of treatment in such historical overviews of metaphysics as,

Spirits in Rebellion by Charles S. Braden (1963).

There is also material on the Internet about treatment, such as Stuart Grayson’s

explanation at http://www.stuartgrayson.com/mindtreatment.html and the very

informative collection of book and book excerpts on New Thought at

http://cornerstone.wwwhubs.com/framepage.htm

In addition to all of these titles and sources, I own a large personal collection of

books on New Thought, Mind Science, and metaphysics.

All of these resources, and more, were devoured to help answer the burning

question of this thesis: “What treatment method works best?”

http://www.stuartgrayson.com/mindtreatment.html

http://www.stuartgrayson.com/mindtreatment.html




Methods

As a student of metaphysics for more than thirty years, I have had personal

experience with different methods of treatment. Some were direct and even harsh, others

were verbal and quick, and still others were silent and distant. All brought some healing

and some peace, but only one seemed to be “the” best treatment method of all.

I once went to a Chi Kung master who said he would heal me by pulling out my

“bad chi.” He did. I screamed as he poked at my ribs and supposedly sucked out the

negative chi in me. His brand of treatment left me black and blue and exhausted. I would

not say he did metaphysical treatment, but instead some Chinese version of it that was

more focused on energy than consciousness.

I spent ten years doing sessions with a hypnotist and NLP master who used verbal

talents and energy work to help me remove inner blocks to my goals. Most of this got

results, and quickly, but I would not say he did typical treatments. While he always asked

for white light and protection, he also ended up manipulating and molesting at least two

clients. That’s an obvious sign, to me, that he was not doing metaphysical treatments.

I have also called the Science of Mind phone line for a telephone treatment. I was

on the phone with the practitioner for maybe ten minutes. She prayed for me, but I sensed

her own skepticism in helping me achieve my stated desires. I would say her own inner

consciousness wasn’t clear enough to do a traditional treatment. My results were nil.

I have worked with a remote healer who did treatments without seeing or

touching me. She apparently focused on me in her mind, cleansed me in her mind, and

fought off any negativity she saw around me in her mind. Results were mixed. The




results seemed to depend on her own well-being at the time. If she couldn’t focus due to

her own personal problems, she couldn’t do a successful treatment.

I also spent a year working with a practitioner who does healing work globally.

She has helped 10,000 people. In the treatments done by her, sometimes she talks to me,

sometimes she is silent. She always invokes God and works for the highest good of all. I

would say her method of treatment is as close to pure as I have yet experienced.

Still, is her method the best form of treatment? Can it be improved? What other

methods are out there which I have never experienced? And out of all of them, which

method works best for the greatest number of people?

Even I have a book that I wrote that offers a 5-step treatment plan. My number

one best-selling book, Spiritual Marketing, offers a way to achieve goals and achieve

inner peace. But I have to admit, I doubt that it is the treatment method of all time.

Again, what treatment method works best?

I’ve struggled with this question for years, and recently very intensely while

researching material to write this thesis. I believe there is a solid, testable, right way to do

treatment---and I’m confused why no one has addressed it before.

My efforts here have been a sincere desire to find out what treatment works

best—for myself, other healers, and for the world at large.

I believe knowing what treatment works best can serve the most number of people

the fastest. In a world where the population keeps expanding, and the problems keep

persisting, having a treatment method on hand that is proven to work would be

considered a God-send---and rightly so.




Results

Where do we start?

A definition of the word “treatment” might help.

But the dictionary won’t help much. My American Heritage Dictionary offers this

short definition of the word treatment :

“1. The act or manner of treating something, such as a person or object. 2. The

application of remedies with the object of effecting a cure: therapy.”

As any aware reader can see, the dictionary doesn’t have a well defined

explanation for treatment. Saying treatment can be “remedies” is the very problem this

thesis is trying to address. Today treatments can be anything from aura cleansing to

prayer to guided visualizations to hypnosis to radical new forms of communing with the

divine to medical treatment, to you name it. I want to know what remedies count as

metaphysical treatment. The way the dictionary has it, a treatment can be anything from

herbal remedies to a chiropractic adjustment!

Again, we need a better starting place.

This thesis assumes that a “treatment” is any metaphysical attempt to help a

person heal whatever it is they state is troubling them.

The key word here, of course, is metaphysical. That will eliminate the herbal

healer, the chiropractor, the astrologer, and so on.

That being the case, what is a metaphysical treatment?

Let’s see what the traditional metaphysicians have to say about it:




Emmet Fox said, “The word ‘treatment’ is usually applied to a prayer that is made

to bring about a certain healing…”

F. L. Rawson wrote, “Treatment is the word used to indicate that form of prayer

which is based upon right thinking, namely, thinking of absolute good. It is actively

thinking of the world of reality, or the absolute, called by the theologians, God and

heaven; by scientific men, cause and its manifestation; and by metaphysicians, Mind and

its ideas.”

Paula Langguth Ryan, a metaphysical healer, wrote me the following in a private

e-mail exchange:

“To me, a metaphysical treatment is an opportunity to help my clients release

or work through obstacles that are preventing them from having exactly what they want

in their lives.

“The treatment method that works best for my clients seems to be to set and hold

an intention in prayer for them of something they want to be, do or have in their lives. I

always hold an intention for 30 days, and always begin each intention with "I see you...."

This powerful phrase creates a visual image of them as they want to be. I see them the

way they want to be, rather than as they often see themselves. I see them with no limits.

Finally, I add the phrase "This or something better now manifests for the highest good of

all."

“I'm a strong believer that everything in this universe is occurring in Divine

Order, in Divine Timing. Whether I'm helping someone create perfect health, increased

wealth, loving relationships, greater peace of mind or anything else, this process never

fails.




Here's an example of a treatment for prosperity that has proven very successful for

countless clients of mine:

“I see all your finances in perfect order now. I see all the financial abundance you

desire manifest in your life now as you release your fears and open yourself up to

receiving your Divine Inheritance from expected and unexpected channels. I see you debt

free and I see prosperity flowing easily and effortlessly into your life from surprising and

wondrous places. I know this is so despite any appearances to the contrary for you are

housed in the rich substance of the Universe and nothing can impede the flow of your

Divine Inheritance. And so it is, this or something better now manifests, for the highest

good of all.”

And Dr. Jon Speller, author of Seed Money In Action, told me in a private e-mail

correspondence, “Treatments, metaphysically, are prayers for others or for self that can

utilize a number of methods, including visualization, Seed Money sowing, etc. Different

methods work better for different individuals, for various reasons.

“For example, some years ago a Jesuit Priest who specialized in psychological

research (he had to call his research on hypnosis "subconscious isolation" in order to

avoid Canon Law proscriptions concerning hypnosis) learned that patients on the

operating table still had subconscious perception even though they were under anesthesia.

“After monitoring a number of operations, including the dialogue of attending

surgeons and staff, the Jesuit came to the conclusion that many cases of unexplained

death through shock on the operating table had a probable relationship to unguarded

negative prognosis comments made by medical staff concerning the supposedly

unconscious patient.




“The Jesuit Priest was discouraged both by senior medical and religious

authorities from going further into that line of research concerning hospitals, because it

could open up all hospitals to numerous potential lawsuits.

“The point is, however, that different patients reacted differently to the same

stimuli, even on a subconscious level, although there was a statistically valid relationship

concerning negative stimuli shown in the Jesuit Father's research.”

That’s the rub. If treatments can be in any form, how does anyone know which

one works best? More importantly, how does an individual suffering, and maybe not

mentally clear about their own needs, select the best form of treatment for them from the

dazzling and confusing display of treatment methods now being offered?

To begin, this thesis will focus on traditional metaphysics to help narrow the

playing field. If treatment in all the possible forms it could appear were covered here, this

would be an encyclopedia, not a thesis.

Next, knowing we have to start somewhere to find our answers, let’s agree on

what a “standard” treatment, or a “traditional” treatment, might consist of.

Jody Carter, in her booklet What Is Treatment?, offers a five-step formula for

doing treatments. Raymond Charles Barker, in his booklet Treatment, offers a six-step

formula. Stuart Grayson has a simple four-step formula for treatments, which he insists

every treatment follows and which he explains on his website. His steps are:

1. Recognition.

You recognize that Infinite Intelligence and Power is everywhere, always. It is

within all beings, all life. You are not simply a materialistically, physically-




ordered individual. You live in life, you experience life, you embrace life

humanly and physically, you love it, but you are in essence oriented toward

primary cause, the prototype behind your experience of life. You are part of the

universal Mind and you express an archetype or pattern in it.

2. Unification

The second part of a treatment is unification or identification, in which you

identify yourself as an individualized part of the whole. We are like the rays of the

sun or like flowers on a plant; each of us is individual but still connected to, still

part of, the whole. In treatment this is expressed with words like “This creative

intelligence is acting through me, expressing as me. It is my mind now, operating

through me.” Another way to think of yourself is as a wave on an infinite ocean.

Thus, in reality you are the ocean as a wave. All the elements or chemicals of the

ocean must also be in its wave. We say the human consciousness is the bridge

between the universal mind and the particular expression in an individual form.

3. Particularization

In the third step of treatment, particularization, you state that every wrong belief,

every blockage, every suggestion that you are separate from the whole, is hereby

banished, neutralized, dissolved, as a result of your purposeful thinking. Therefore

you are able to see clearly who you are, what you are, where you are, and know

what to do. You recognize that the perfect pattern or prototype for your




experience (specific health of a body part or function) exists and is the substance

and form of your body experience now.

4. Release

The final stage of treatment is release. You surrender to the action of the universal

intelligence or Mind and release the healing treatment to the law of creative

action, knowing change or fulfillment is happening. It cannot fail to happen,

because it is the neutral action of the universal law.

Orrin Moen offers a five-step formula for giving treatments in his 1961 book, The

Mirror of Your Mind. They are similar to Grayson’s steps. He describes them as follows:

1. Recognition. In this step we recognize that God is the only intelligence.

2. Unification. We next unify our thinking with God.

3. Realization. We must now reestablish that feeling and knowingness of being

one with god.

4. Thanksgiving. We now thank God that our life is complete.

5. Release. We act as though it (the problem) doesn’t exist.

V. Manley Ayers offers a three-step formula in his essay “That For Which We

stand” in the 1941 book, Mind Remakes Your World. He wrote:

1. Stop thinking of the problem; think of God.




2. Lift your thought to your highest conception of God, Man, Heaven.

3. Continue treating until you touch the point of releasement.

And just for the sake of contrast, let’s look at one more formula approach to doing

treatments. This one is off the Internet, and written by Jeri Noble. She says:

“Writing a metaphysical treatment is an organized way of focusing your

attention and concentration when there's something you want to manifest in your

life or for someone else. There's an acronym to help remember the sequence of

steps for this:

Are R

You U

Ready R

To T

Receive? R

The first "R" is for Recognition

In this step we are recognizing the spiritual truth of the Universe, which is that

everything which could possibly exist, already does exist in Divine

Consciousness, or Mind. Since this Divinity is perfect, then all of It's creations are

also perfect and it is up to us to be able to perceive this perfection.




Here's an example:

Let's say that we want to treat for the healing of a sore toe. The proper

consciousness of this would be that we want the inner reality of a whole, perfect

and complete toe to be revealed to us. Remember, it already exists in conscious-

ness, we just have to bring our awareness up to the recognition of this fact. So our

statement looks like this:

Recognition: I recognize that there is only God (Goddess, the Divine, my Higher

Power, the Universe, or whatever your term is). In God, there can be only perfect

health, and perfect toes. I see this perfection in nature and everywhere around me.

"U" is for Unification

We are also recognize that this Infinite Potential must necessarily also exist within

us, because after all, It is infinite so there's nothing that is not It, including you

and me.

Unification: I am now aware of the great unity in all things, that I am One with

this great Infinite. It (he/she) is in me and all around me, permeating my being.

Therefore, I am one with this perfect health and cannot be otherwise.

The second "R" is for Realization

The realization step is where your affirmation comes from. It is important that you

allow this consciousness to sink deeply into your reality.

Realization: I know that my perfect health is already in existence and I accept it

into my life fully, without reservation or inhibition. All of my toes feel great and

each one is whole, perfect and complete. This is an established fact which I now

allow myself to comprehend, down to every cell in my body.




"T" is for Thanksgiving

We can only be truly grateful for that which we have received or know that we are

going to receive. That's why this step is so important - it helps us to know this.

Thanksgiving: Knowing that I already have the perfect health that I need, I am

deeply grateful. My heart opens with joy and appreciation for this new revelation

of reality as I accept that indeed, my perfect health is now manifested. Thank you

Mother-Father God.

The third "R" is for Release

If you don't really, truly let it go, the Universe has no chance of manifesting it for

you. You have to let it go in order to allow the Divine to pick it up. "Let go and

let God".

Release: Knowing that I already have the perfect health that I have desired, I now

freely let go of this treatment to the One that is the Source of my Being. My faith

and trust are complete in knowing that the surrender of this is my signal that it is

now out of my hands and in the care of my Higher Power.”

While Stuart Grayson’s four-step formula, Orrin Moen’s five-step formula, V.

Manley Ayers’ three-step formula, and Jeri Noble’s five-step formula all help us realize

treatment at least has steps in them---at least according to Grayson, Moen, Ayers, and

Noble---an early founder of metaphysics might disagree with those very steps.

For example, Nona Brooks, the founder of Divine Science, is said to have gotten

her best results when she did treatments by not doing them. That is, when she surrendered

her desire and her will to the divine, the results came almost by magic. Her biographer




explained it this way in the book, Powerful Is The Light: “Her release of the matter was

in no sense resignation. On the contrary, real release to an Infinite Cause carried most

dynamic action.”

It seems that when Brooks was convinced of what she wanted, she simply relaxed

into a knowing that it would come to pass, and somehow that treatment method worked.

If that’s the case, which treatment method works best?

The instant one or the multiple-steps one?

And if it’s one of the multiple step formulas, which one of them works best?

Ernest Holmes simplifies the quest for an answer to that question by saying there

are at least two types of treatment: the argumentative and the realization.

The argumentative style of treatment, according to Holmes in The Science of

Mind, “…is a process of mental reasoning in which the practitioner argues to himself

about his patient.”

This appears to be the method of Phineas Parkhurst Quimby, generally considered

the father of New Thought. In volume three of The Complete Writings of Quimby, there

are many stories of how Quimby conducted his treatments. In the following excerpt a

“Mr. R” goes to Quimby seeking healing of swollen eyes and facial blisters.

“So Mr. Quimby commenced taking up his feelings, one by one, like a lawyer

examining witnesses, analyzing them and showing him that he had put a false

construction on all his feelings, showing him that a different explanation would have

produced a different result.”

After Quimby’s argumentative treatment, “Mr. R” is healed by the next morning.




Obviously, the argumentative method works, at least in the hands of a master such

as Quimby.

But what about the other method of treatment: Realization?

Ernest Holmes goes on to explain, “The realization method is whereby the

practitioner realizes within himself---without the necessity of step by step building up a

conclusion---the perfect state of his patient.”

This helps. At least we’ve narrowed our scope down to two categories of

treatment styles. It explains why Grayson and others need steps to do a treatment. They

were doing the argumentative style of treatment. It also explains what Brooks was doing:

the realization style treatment.

Still, in either case, what is the best method for treatment? And whether it is the

formula approach or the enlightenment approach, which works best? Can anyone do

either style? Which style gets the best results? The quest for the answer to the question of

this thesis continues.

Daniel Boone Herring, writing in his 1931 book, Mind Surgery, suggests there

had got to be a formula for treatments. He wrote: “If a thing ‘works’ it must be scientific,

although its formula may not yet be reduced to a definition.”

Ernest Holmes would agree. In his 1948 book, How to Use Science of Mind, he

writes: “Unless there were a method for spiritual mind practice, then such practice would

not be scientific. Unless there were a definite technique, its use could not be taught.” And

later he wrote, in Living the Science of Mind: “Unless there were a definite method of

procedure in spiritual mind healing, it could not be considered scientific.”




In this thesis we are looking for that formula, the proven technique, to successful

treatments. If Grayson says it takes four-steps, Moen five-steps, and Ayers three-steps,

yet Brooks suggests it takes only one step, what, in reality, is the correct answer? What is

the formula for successful treatments? As soon as we know it, we will have a formula we

can promote and reproduce so more people get more results.

Ernest Holmes again offers some light when he explains, “The spiritual

practitioner does not make a demonstration merely by saying peace when there is no

peace. He makes a demonstration only when confusion is converted into peace.”

This is fascinating. Holmes seems to be saying that what is most important in the

success of any treatment is not the person being treated but the consciousness of the

person doing the treating. In other words, if the metaphysical practitioner is not clear, he

or she will not give a good treatment, no matter what formula they follow.

F. L. Rawson wrote in Life Understood: “When you treat, it should be clearly

understood that you are the person for whom, in the first instance, the error has to be

destroyed. When the false belief in the disease or trouble that appears to be connected

with the patient is thoroughly destroyed in your own ‘consciousness,’ and the truth

realized of the perfection of man as God’s image and likeness, then it is that the so-called

patient is freed. You become a channel through which Truth works.”

This helps explain why Nona Brooks was successful when she let go of her

desires in her treatments. She was in essence first being sure she was clear. When she was

clear, the divine was free to move in and help. No steps were taken or needed except one:

Feel peace within.

Is that all there is to a successful treatment?




(At the same time the question is asked, the thought arises that being at peace isn’t

always all that easy. It’s the quest of all people. Most never find it. So just being at the

stage of pure contentment is quite an accomplishment. Still, is that all there is to it?)

Apparently inner change is the key, whether you are doing the treatment or

getting one. In other words, as soon as you can change your consciousness, you’ll change

your results. Then the treatment – any treatment - will work. In fact, the best treatment is

the one that will help you change your consciousness the fastest.

Raymond Charles Barker, in his 1957 book The Science of Successful Living, put

it this way: “You have a right to expect results from your spiritual thinking. Your

spiritual thinking changes you. It doesn’t change the world. It doesn’t change other

people. It changes you, and that is all that needs to be changed. Once you have changed,

the results of this change appear in your circumstances.”

Again, this statement is eye-opening. Barker is suggesting that you can do

treatments on yourself by “simply” thinking spiritually. That also implies that if you are a

practitioner and a client comes to you for treatment, you are to work on your own

thinking, not theirs. When you are thinking spiritually about the client, the client will

change. Again, as Barker wrote above: “Once you have changed, the results of this

change appear in your circumstances.” Those “outer circumstances” include the client

before you!

Or, as Lester Levenson, founder of the modern treatment technique called the

Sedona Method, put it in his 1993 book, Keys To The Ultimate Freedom, “If we don’t

like what’s happening to us in the world, all we have to do is change our consciousness---

and the world out there changes for us!”




So, again, what treatment method is best?

Does all a practitioner have to do is sit and get happy?

Maybe so. According to Dr. Frederick Bailes, in his 1951 book, Basic Principles

of the Science of Mind, “The entire treatment is an action within the mind of the

practitioner, by himself, upon himself, but for the purpose of correcting the patient’s

false belief.” (Bolded words are by Bailes.)

Ernest Holmes agrees. In his 1984 book, Living the Science of Mind, he says

“The treatment should be simple, unlabored, calm, but designed to convince the thought

of the one who gives it.”

And Craig Carter, writing in the January 1994 issue of Science of Mind magazine,

also agrees by saying: “There are many ways to give a metaphysical treatment for

healing, but there is only one purpose behind any treatment, which is to change the

consciousness of the person giving the treatment. Generally speaking, this is done either

by "argument" or by "realization," but the effect is the same.”

Still, what method of treatment are we talking about here?

It’s beginning to look like the word “treatment” is an umbrella term for a

collection of methods designed to free the mind of limiting beliefs. Even Bailes, in his

home study course, offers a half dozen methods for doing treatments. He admits, “There

will be moments in the student’s healing work when his treatment seems to be getting

nowhere…”

What we seem to have here is inconclusive evidence. Any method of treatment

might work. They may consist of steps. They may have multiple or simple steps. They




may be instantaneous. They may be variations of old methods or completely original

ones. The list goes on.

And maybe the answer to the question of this thesis --- “What treatment method

works best?” --- can’t be answered by anyone until someone does a thorough study of all

the traditional treatment styles and then runs controlled tests on them. Maybe then, with a

more scientific eye on the question and the findings, will we be able to answer the

question with some degree of accuracy.

To wrap-up this short investigation into treatments, I would say that the current

“best” method for doing treatments at least involves these two steps:

1. Focus beyond the problem---on the underlying perfection. If you can do that

in an instant (realization), great. If it requires talking to yourself to get to that

space (argumentative), then that is great, too. Aligning with the divine is the

first and key step.

2. Let go---allow God to make everything right.

In short, the best method of treatment is the one that helps the practitioner reach

an inner level of communication with God, where he or she knows all is well underneath

all outward appearances. Whatever plugs the practitioner into that experience is the best

method of treatment – for now.




Discussion

Society can benefit from a careful study of treatment methods.

The more people know about their options, the greater power they have in making

positive choices. The more people know about treatments, the better they can make an

informed decision. And the more people know about treatments, the sooner they can heal,

grow, and experience their inner divinity. All of this can only benefit all of us.

The more practitioners know about the tools available to them, the better they can

serve humanity.

Far too many practitioners are stuck in a one-way approach to doing treatments.

They end up seeing life through the eye-glasses of that particular treatment method. Yet

the clients they see may require other methods. Or, more importantly, the practitioners

may require other methods of treatment to help them get clear before they can help their

clients heal.

Again, knowing more about treatments can only help the world.

If this thesis proves anything, it is that there are at least two types of treatment

available: the argumentative and the realization.

For most practitioners, the argumentative style is what they will use. Still, under

that heading, there are numerous multiple-step methods to attaining results. As far as I

can see, the results aren’t in yet to declare which method works best.

I urge everyone in the metaphysical profession to consider further research on this

subject. It can only help all of us.




Summary and Conclusions

In 1912, F. L. Rawson wrote in his book, Treatment, the following:

“In the early days of metaphysical healing, some forty years ago, the better

educated people would not take the trouble to investigate the subject and, be exemplified

in the life of Jesus, it was amongst the lower classes that the truth spread more rapidly. It

was found that if a man of the lower classes was shown a method of working, he was apt

to make it a formula, namely, he did not understand what was said and it became a group

of words which did not convey an adequate meaning. Consequently, in the early days of

metaphysical healing each person was usually left to work out a method of treatment

from the standpoint of personal understanding. When he did this the words he used had a

definite meaning to him, and he did not have to try to think out what the writer of the

words meant. Consequently in teaching, it is better to get the student to write out the way

in which he treats and then to correct it and give him additional points as to the

improvement of the treatment.”

Again, Rawson wrote those words in 1912. I believe they are just as valid today.

What he urged then is what I urge today: Let’s record how we do treatments and then

help each other polish and improve our methods so we can get the best results possible.

Finally, if we are to end this thesis with any sort of conclusion, it’s this:

1. Treatments are mental methods designed to free the mind of the one doing

them so they are attuned to the divine.

2. There isn’t any one method of doing treatment. Whatever method of treatment

achieves results is the best method of treatment---for that moment and that person.




3. Based on the limited research conducted to write this thesis, we can’t declare

anything more helpful than this advice: Learn the various methods and use what seems

best at the moment.

In short, further study of treatments, and testing of them, is called for. Meanwhile,

whatever works to get you closer to God is the best method of treatment.

As I said earlier, I would say that the current “best” method for doing treatments

at least involves these two steps:

1. Focus beyond the problem---on the underlying perfection. If you can do that

in an instant (realization), great. If it requires talking to yourself to get to that

space (argumentative), then that is great, too. Aligning with the divine is the

first and key step.

2. Let go---allow God to make everything right.

In short, the best method of treatment is the one that helps the practitioner reach

an inner level of communication with God.

Achieve that state and you’re on the way to miracles.




Bibliography

Bailes, Frederick. 1951. Basic Principles of the Science of Mind: Home Study Course.

Marina del Ray, CA: DeVorss & Company Publishers

Barker, Raymond Charles. 1957. The Science of Successful Living. NYC: Dodd, Mead.

Barker, Raymond Charles. 2000. Treatment. Marina del Ray, CA: DeVorss

Braden, Charles. S. 1963. Spirits in Rebellion. Dallas: Southern Methodist University.

Carter, Jody. 1978. What Is Treatment? Marina del Ray, CA: DeVorss

Deane, Hazel. 1945. Powerful Is The Light. Denver: Divine Science College.

Fox, Emmet. 1942. Make Your Life Worthwhile. NYC: HarperCollins.

Gill, Gillian. 1998. Mary Baker Eddy. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.

Grayson, Stuart. 2000. http://www.stuartgrayson.com/mindtreatment.html

Herring, Daniel Boone. 1931. Mind Surgery. Chicago: Little Publishing.

Holmes, Ernest. 1948. How To Use Science of Mind. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.

Holmes, Ernest. 1984. Living the Science of Mind. Marina del Ray, CA: DeVorss.

Holmes, Ernest. 1941. Mind Remakes Your World. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.

Holmes, Ernest. 1938. The Science of Mind. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.

Levenson, Lester. 1993. Keys To The Ultimate Freedom. Phoenix: Sedona Institute.

Moen, Orrin. 1961. The Mirror of Your Mind. Los Angeles: DeVorss & Co.

Murphy, Joseph. 2002. Think Yourself to Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New York:

Reward Books/Prentice Hall Press

Noble, Jeri. 2001. http://www.cedarfire.com/art.treatment-jeri.shtml

Rawson, F. L. 1912. Treatment, or Healing By True Prayer. London: SSKTP.




Rawson, F. L. 1925. Life Understood. London: K.T.P. Publishing.

Sears, F. W. 1913. How to Give Treatments Personal and Absent. London: Fower.

Speller, Jon. 2002. Seed Money In Action. Austin, TX: Hypnotic Marketing, Inc.

Quimby, Phineas P. 1988. The Complete Writings. Marina del Ray, CA: DeVorss

Vitale, Joe. 2002. Spiritual Marketing. Austin, TX: 1stBooks Library

_joe vitale - which metaphysic treatment works best

Documents