Our critic is right in stating that Christian Science "is...

J. V. Dittemore

Auburn (N. Y.) Citizen

Our critic is right in stating that Christian Science "is nothing if it is not a religion" and a very old one. Webster defines religion as "the recognition of God as an object of worship, love, and obedience." Christian Science accepts this definition and affirms that men's apprehension and understanding of God and His laws will bring to humanity today as of old the full measure of blessings promised by the Master to "them that believe" and understand. It is also true that Christian Science "is an old religion," because God has always existed and His laws have been ever operative and ever available to those who have apprehended and demonstrated their verity. Christian Science affirms that the so-called miracles of Jesus were based on a definite, unvarying, ever-operative, divine Principle; that they were not supernatural and in contravention of law, but that they were the natural and inevitable results of his spiritual understanding and correct application. The supremacy of spiritual power over material conditions has been demonstrated by prophets and apostles of all climes and ages.

The clergyman is wrong, however, in stating that Christian Science "antagonizes every fundamental tenet of the word of God, and entirely undermines the foundation of Christianity." It would be correct to state that Christian Science uncovers and makes plain to mortals the fallacies of man-made theology which have become confused with the true "word of God," and it is also true that Christian Science "undermines the foundation" of that false conception of Christianity which bases its claims on superstition, ignorance, and blind, unreasoning prejudice. The doctor's conception of Satan is certainly interesting. He tells us that "next to God" he is the most powerful being in the world. If there were such a being as Satan, and if he had any power whatever, God would no longer be omnipotent. Fortunately this medieval superstition is today confined to a very small coterie of theologians, and in the light of intelligence the world is rapidly perceiving that the only "devil" is impersonal evil, and the only "hell" the suffering we experience for our sin, ignorance, and obedience to false man-made beliefs.

Our critic has an erroneous idea of the Christian Scientists' conception of the unreality of matter. The entire import of the teachings of the Master was to show that "heaven and earth," the material sense of existence, "shall pass away," but that his "words," the truth he voiced—the spiritual understanding of God and His laws, "shall not pass away." In relation to mortal man he said, "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing."

The critic is nearer the truth in starting that Christian Scientists affirm sin to be "an error which can be thought away." All sin is of mental procurement. The thought precedes the action. Therefore, as mortals "put off the old man" and gain more of that Mind "which was also in Christ Jesus," ignorance and false beliefs will diminish until they disappear, and it will then be obvious that they were destructible, therefore unreal, and no part of the reality or permanence which characterize the true creations of Deity.

The clergyman is forced to admit that "Christian Scientists can quote the Bible freely." This should convince him that they are at least seeking for truth. As a matter of fact, Christian Scientists depend wholly on the spiritual import of the Scriptures. They trust their very lives to its teaching, and surely no better evidence of one's faith in the teachings of the Bible could be given.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit