Article November 11, 1911 Issue

If Christian Science practice were such as our critic indicates,...

H. Coulson Fairchild

Jersey City (N. J.) Journal

If Christian Science practice were such as our critic indicates, no Christian Scientist could endorse it, but we are glad to say that he has not described adequately the practice of Christian Science. It seems to me that his reply is irrelevant to his first proposition, which was: "Any physician will tell you that Christian Science is unable to do anything in the matter of restoring health where a pathological lesion exists, as in distinct cases of tuberculosis, typhoid fever, or locomotor ataxia where the spinal cord is affected." In reply to our critic's proposition, I cited three cases cured by Christian Science treatment after these cases had been given up as hopeless by doctors of medicine. One was a case of cancer, another a distinct case of tuberculosis of the lungs, the third a case of spinal disease where mechanical appliances and braces were used to support the child's body. These well-authenticated cases, which were cured under Christian Science treatment, were presented in refutation of our critic's quotation that Christian Science is unable to do anything in the matter of restoring health where a pathological lesion exists. The only reply which our critic vouchsafes to this, as indicated in his article published Dec. 30, is this: "As to the three cures mentioned by Mr. Fairchild, I note that all three cases were for a time under medical treatment, and they had in all probability, like any number of other cases, reached the point where nature was able to cure herself; the province of all medical treatment being to assist and accelerate this process."

It appears to me that he has given altogether too much credit to medical treatment for bringing these cases up to the point where, as he says, "nature was able to cure herself." The fact is that these patients had all abandoned medical treatment in despair, and is it not an unusual coincidence that nature began to work just as soon as Christian Science treatment was administered? If such is the action of nature, and she only begins to cure when medical treatment ceases, would it not have been better if the hundred and forty thousand who are said to die daily under medical treatment had resorted to Christian Science, so that nature could effect the cure unhindered by material means?

Certain other thoughts arise in connection with these cases. For instance, some contend that medicine does not remain long in the system, and in cases of tuberculosis the latter-day physician sometimes recommends air, sunshine, hygiene, etc., as a cure. When a cure of tuberculosis is effected by Christian Science treatment after air, sunshine, hygiene, climatic conditions, etc., have failed, what then cures the patient? The answer can only be that "man's extremity is God's opportunity;" as a last resort we turn to God and are healed.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

If Christian Science practice were such as our critic indicates,...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access