I am neither a member nor an attendant of a Christian Science...

Rochester (N. Y.) Union and Advertiser

I am neither a member nor an attendant of a Christian Science church, but I am an honest investigator of the truth of what it claims to teach. Having read the Rev. Mr.—'s article, recently printed in one of your contemporaries, I am greatly surprised that any minister of the gospel of Christ would stoop to the use of such language. I also wish to say that Sunday evening, May 10, I heard this same gentleman's sermon on "Christian Science in the Light of the Scriptures." I attended the service expecting to hear some logical argument by which I, not being a very close student of the Bible, might decide as to whether Christian Science has a right to base its teachings on those of that book. I must say that I was disappointed. The sermon was very like the article already referred to.

The first sentence in Mrs. Eddy's interpretation of the Lord's Prayer (based, as I suppose, on Genesis i. 27), was dwelt upon at some length, and the thought of the motherhood of God was held up to ridicule. The clergyman did not, however, show why the female, or mother, cannot claim, according to that passage, to be the image of God as well as the male, or father. The passage distinctly says that "God created man in His own image, ... male and female created he them." If there is no mother element in God, how can the woman, or mother, claim to be the image of God? The clergyman would allow that honor only to the male portion of God's creation. The Bible does not speak of a female deity in whose image woman could have been created, so I think Mrs. Eddy more logical than the clergyman, and I prefer to think of God as possessing the qualities of both fatherhood and motherhood, as the above passage states.

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit