Article November 23, 1912 Issue

Our critic lays the foundation for his argument by stating...

Olcott Haskell

San Jose (Cal.) Mercury

Our critic lays the foundation for his argument by stating, "The laws of nature are the expressions of the will of God." Mrs. Eddy says: "In one sense God is identical with nature, but this nature is spiritual and is not expressed in matter" (Science and Health, p. 119). It is probable that our friend has not considered where his assumption inevitably leads. God's laws certainly do not dispense disease and destruction, and to assume that they do is to become involved in just such unthinkable hypotheses as have turned many a good man away from the thought of such a monstrous concept of God; whereas, if God were understood as divine Principle, as infinite good, and if His laws were understood as promoting life and harmony, men would regard God correctly and would recognize Him as the protecting Father, and as the author of "every good gift."

No Christian Scientist would advocate that a man should trust God without obeying His law. In fact, an intelligent trust involves an understanding of God and obedience to His will. Jesus followed perfectly the will of his Father, yet he never obeyed a "law" of sin or of sickness. He proved that God's law rightly interpreted saves from all evil, and that sickness is neither sent by God nor produced by His laws. The Bible affords no warrant for rashness, or for attempting that which one is not able to accomplish, yet it also affords no excuse for yielding either to sin or to sickness. Christian Scientists do not ignore present human conditions, but they comply with them as far as necessary, until progress enables them to obtain results in a better way. The lives of the constantly increasing number of successful Christian Scientists afford ample proof of this. If our critic refuses to accept the Scriptural evidence of divine healing, it may be that he is not prepared to accept more modern evidence; yet many physicians frankly acknowledge the successful healings of Christian Science.

In my previous article I quoted from a government report in which Professor Fisher, chairman of the committee of one hundred, states: "There was no reason why it [the profession] should have lost hundreds of thousands of patients to Christian Science except that these patients were for the most part benefited, and greatly benefited, by Christian Science after having received no benefit, often injury, from the profession." Some years ago, in the case of The People vs. Merrill Reed et al., heard in Los Angeles, twenty witnesses were placed on the stand and testified to the healing they had received through Christian Science. These witnesses were people well known in the community, and their testimony, given under oath, was subject to cross-examination. The cases healed ranged from tuberculosis and sciatic rheumatism to a deformed foot, spinal trouble, and insanity. In our own state of California there are nearly one hundred cities and towns where public meetings are held every Wednesday evening, to which visitors are welcome, and where may be heard and seen direct evidence that Christian Science heals all sorts and conditions of men, restoring them morally as well as physically.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

Our critic lays the foundation for his argument by stating...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access