Article February 17, 1912 Issue

To me Christian Science is—well, I shall not say it, because...

St. Louis (Mo.) Mirror

To me Christian Science is—well, I shall not say it, because I don't want to read the letters I'd get, if I did say it, from the efficient and irrepressible publication committee. But for all that, it seems to me the height of absurdity, or maybe the depth, for the authorities to prosecute Christian Scientists for practising medicine without a license. Whatever the Christian Scientists practise, they don't practise medicine. They do not claim to cure. They only say that faith in Christ will cure. They do not profess even to give one that faith. One must have it in and of one's self. They cannot be said to deceive any one. They only encourage faith and hope in those with whom they deal. How much of just such encouragement of faith and hope is the real capital of many practitioners of regular medicine? In so far as Christian Science is a religion, it should not require a license to practise it in this town. In so far as it is a theory of health and illness it is not a thing to be prohibited. One may defend the cult as to that on grounds of free speech. Prayer cannot be either a crime or a misdemeanor. I cannot see that the government, state or municipal, has any well-founded right to prevent healing by Christian Scientists. If it be said they don't heal, the answer is, that often the practitioners of medicine don't heal. They do heal in some cases. Even the doctors of medicine admit this, and further than that, they, the doctors of medicine, sometimes apply Christian Science methods, without either Christianity or Science.

Enjoy 1 free Sentinel article or audio program each month, including content from 1898 to today.

Send a comment to the editors
NEXT IN THIS ISSUE
Article
With all due respect for our clerical critic, I must take...
February 17, 1912
Contents

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit