In a sermon, a synopsis of which recently appeared in...

The News

In a sermon, a synopsis of which recently appeared in the News, the clergyman is reported as deploring the fact that a young boy and his parents sought God, rather than the medical doctor, in his affliction. The question is: Shall the plain, simple spirituality, taught and practised without resort to material means by Jesus, his disciples, Paul, and the early Christians, with unparalleled success in healing, be practised in our time, or shall it be regarded merely as an impracticable theory, as the reverend gentleman suggests?

Does it not mean anything to professing Christians that thousands of cases of healing by radical reliance on God's power are recorded in the Bible, and that other thousands are being healed to-day by the same spiritual means? Is the theoretical religion of the rabbis or the practical religion of Christ Jesus "of a sane and thoughtful type"? If it is "fanaticism" to rely practically on the love, care, power, and presence of God (Spirit, Mind), what shall be said of the minister or other person who preaches this in theory and denies it in practice? There may be among Christian Scientists an occasional failure to heal, and no one regrets it more than do they, but the percentage of cures is greatly in their favor. ... No one is compelled to have Christian Science treatment or is denied a medical doctor if wanted, neither should he be compelled to have medical treatment and denied Christian Science treatment if wanted. This rule applies equally with adults and children and is in conformity with the Golden Rule and the Christian spirit.

November 28, 1908
Contents

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit