Are you sure?
This bookmark will be removed from all folders and any saved notes will be permanently removed.
Our critic's assumption that the Christian Scientist in the...
Oak Leaves
Our critic's assumption that the Christian Scientist in the treatment of the sick is entirely without discrimination as to differing types of disease, and, as he puts it, sees no "difference between smallpox and pimples," is hardly warranted by the facts. However, it may be truly said that Christian Scientists do not carry the question of discrimination to the extent of saying that one class of disease may be healed by divine power, while another class may not be so cured. They find no warrant in the Scriptures for concluding that fundamental and nervous disorders may be cured by the power of God, but that organic diseases must be left to the skill of man, thereby putting human skill above the divine power. The psalmist declares that God "healeth all thy diseases," and it is not recorded that Jesus differentiated between the classes of disease in his treatment of the sick.
The success of Christian Science in the healing of physical disease seems to be the feature which is very frequently emphasized in discussions of the subject, probably for the reason that this is the phase Christian Science which at first most strongly appeals to the average investigator. However, while this successful healing of "all manner of disease" is a matter of intense interest to those who have heretofore been engaged in a desperate and unsuccessful warfare with sickness, nevertheless it is a fact that one cannot be long acquainted with Christian Science without discovering that its chief work is that of moral regeneration. Indeed, one could not possibly be healed in Christian Science without becoming, in some degree at least, less sinful. In this connection it is interesting to note that the critic often makes the mistake of supposing that Christian Science teaches that sin is "best conquered as it is ignored."
No one who is correctly informed on this subject would suppose for one moment that Christian Scientists believe that they can get rid of sin by ignoring it or by simply calling it a delusion. Christian Science woos the sinner from his sin by convincing him that he need not fear sin and cannot love it, because it is not of God. It shows him that God does not create sin, and that He does not permit its existence. It teaches him that sin and evil are entirely contrary to the will of God and that they have nothing to do with God's man. Thus it induces the sinner to abandon his belief in the reality, power, and pleasure of sin, and enables him to win forgiveness by forsaking sin. For this reason it will be seen that it is a mistake to suppose that in teaching the unreality of sin Christian Science encourages the indulgence of sin. On the contrary, it awakens the sinner to the absolute necessity of gaining a love for goodness that will enable him to abandon not only the flagrant forms of immorality and vice, but also the more subtle phases of evil.
Enjoy 1 free Sentinel article or audio program each month, including content from 1898 to today.
April 24, 1909 issue
View Issue-
EVIL IMPERSONAL
SAMUEL GREENWOOD.
-
"THE SWORD OF THE SPIRIT"
ARTHUR E. JENNINGS.
-
"WATCH YE THEREFORE"
ANNIE M. PAYNE.
-
GRATITUDE
GENEVIEVE BOOTH.
-
THE CHANGED THOUGHT
ERNESTINE HADKINSON.
-
THE NINETY-FIRST PSALM
JOHN ASHCROFT.
-
ATTAINMENT
ELLEN ALMIRA DOW.
-
Our critic is right in stating that Christian Science "is...
J. V. Dittemore
-
Our critic's assumption that the Christian Scientist in the...
George Shaw Cook
-
We would like to ask our critic if he considers the Mind...
H. Coulson Fairchild
-
The gentleman who is discussing Christian Science in...
Willard S. Mattox
-
A recent criticism delivered at the Museum of Art is...
Charles K. Skinner
-
MRS. EDDY TAKES NO PATIENTS
Editor
-
THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION
Archibald McLellan
-
HONESTY
Annie M. Knott
-
A HAZARDOUS CONCLUSION
John B. Willis
-
LETTERS TO OUR LEADER
with contributions from Frank Householder, Louise Delisle Radzinski, Susan A. Beauchamp, Tyna P. Stillwell, Katharine McBean, Marguerite Lynn, Blanche S. Shannon, Chas. L. Dunham, Gertrude E. Salter, Mary Rice Brinton, John F. Phillips
-
THE LECTURES
with contributions from Clifford P. Smith, Ben M. Smith, Frederick Neudorff
-
As it is now over three years since I was healed in...
Clara J. Swanets
-
I am glad indeed to express publicly my gratitude for...
Susan Ames Deering
-
It is about nine years since I came into Christian Science
Ernest Ruoff with contributions from Cora Ruoff
-
I wish to express my heartfelt thankfulness for the many...
Hattie L. Phillips
-
Humbly, prayerfully, and with an earnest desire that...
I. I. Hildreth with contributions from Grace N. Deming
-
I am glad to be able to add my testimony to those of...
Margaret E. Hamann
-
It is with the greatest pleasure that I submit my testimony...
Frank S. Hornbeck
-
Before Christian Science was brought to my notice I...
Jean C. Green
-
Seven years ago I learned what it means to "trust in the...
W. J. Cantonwine
-
My heart is full of gratitude for my understanding of...
Anderson Jefferson
-
In gratitude to God for all the blessings which have...
Caroline A. Breadner
-
REASSURANCE
MARION COOK STOW
-
FROM OUR EXCHANGES
with contributions from C. A. S. Dwight