Editorial February 24, 1912 Issue

THE ALLNESS OF GOOD

Annie M. Knott

Every sincere student of Christian Science would admit that the "scientific statement of being," given on page 468 of Science and Health, is the basis of all right reasoning, inasmuch as it posits as fundamental truth the allness of God and the consequent nothingness of error. No other religious teaching save that of Christ Jesus has taken this position and consistently followed it to its logical conclusion, namely, a denial of the reality of sin, disease, and death, whatever be the evidence before the material senses as to their verity. Christian Science declares in this "statement" that "there is no life, truth, intelligence, nor substance in matter;" and here it should not be forgotten that while Christian Scientists have to deal with the belief that evil has certain manifestations, these have no substance, and belief in them has no intelligence; hence evil, or error, is without reality to the one who accepts and understands the truth of being.

It is well for us, however, to guard against the mistake of attempting to drive error out of the physical realm, while leaving it entrenched in the mental, the plane of mortal belief. To illustrate, a student of Christian Science would hesitate to say, "I have a headache," because he knows that no discord exists to God, or to the real man who is God's likeness. If, on the other hand, he were to say, "I have a belief in a headache," he would be making the matter worse, for he would be giving the error a place in his consciousness, from which all error should be expelled by the truth. He might of course say that a non-Scientist had such a belief, but he could hardly say it of one who claimed to know the truth. Here we may with profit recall the Master's words, "Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."

It sometimes happens that students of Christian Science give undue emphasis to error by insisting that every manifestation of disease must be classified and attached to some special phase of sinful belief. It is true that Mrs. Eddy says, "A moral question may hinder the recovery of the sick," but she also says that "we must deny sin and plead God's allness" (Science and Health, pp. 419, 15). This means that we must not dignify evil by making it either cause or effect, for the uncovering of sin by divine Truth (not by blind conjecture) means its annihilation. Our text-book says, "Truth should, and does, drive error out of all selfhood" (p. 538). Christian Science teaches us that we should neither fear sin nor love it. We must not even admit that error can resist the demands and the activity of God's law, for it cannot. If it could ever have done so, we should not have the glorious records of Truth's omnipotence which enrich the pages of the gospels,—not only in the mighty works of Christ Jesus, but in his declaration to his followers: "I give you power... over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you;" a promise which is grandly fulfilled in Christian Science.

Send a comment to the editors

NEXT IN THIS ISSUE

Article

AMONG THE CHURCHES