Article September 6, 1913 Issue

Our clerical critic repudiates and disparages Christian...

John I,. Rendall

Toledo (Iowa) Democrat

Our clerical critic repudiates and disparages Christian healing in the following words: "Christ never specifically commanded us to heal the sick." This must be between him and his God. Christian Scientists insist that Christ's command to "heal the sick" was for all time, everywhere, and is now binding upon all Christians. As a matter of history, Jesus' disciples were healers, and the early Christians for three hundred years after Jesus' time practised Christian healing as an essential, integral part of their religion. If Christian healing is not essential to Christianity, the burden of proof must be upon its opponents, for the Bible is full of it, and not one Scriptural command in this respect can be said to have ever been rightfully abrogated.

It must be remembered that Christian Scientists do not claim to be able to heal sickness or disease because of any supposed power within themselves. They stand squarely upon the promises of the manifestation of God's healing power as given in the Bible. Either these promises are true and verifiable, or they are not. Christian Scientists contend for and are daily proving their verity. Our critic states that certain forms of disease are not cured by Christian Science, or, in other words, God is unable to heal. This is simply an ignorant statement based upon insufficient knowledge of facts. It can be and has been irrefutably established in proof, that the power of God through Christian Science treatment has healed every phase of disease known to materia medica, including leprosy. This does not mean that every Christian Science practitioner has healed every sort of disease, but that within the scope of the entire practise of Christian Science such diseases have all been cured. And why not, since the Bible says of God that He "healeth all thy diseases"? I will call our critic's attention to the fact that a surgeon does not heal a broken bone; he simply sets it. Christian Scientists sometimes employ a surgeon to set a bone because he is supposed to know how to do it properly. There are, however, many cases of the restoration of broken bones by mental and spiritual means alone.

Our critic makes a great ado over the supposition that Christian Scientists deny that "Jesus is the Christ." If he will read "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures" by Mrs. Eddy, the text-book of Christian Science, he will find Christ Jesus, or Jesus the Christ, referred to five hundred and sixty-two times, and always in terms of greatest reverence and appreciation. I will cite one instance from the tenets of Christian Science (p. 497): "We acknowledge and adore one supreme and infinite God. We acknowledge His Son, one Christ; the Holy Ghost or divine Comforter; and man in God's image and likeness." Mrs. Eddy's statements respecting Jesus Christ and his relation to God, the Father, are the most reasonable, practical, and satisfactory ever given to humanity, and they accord absolutely with the teachings of Scripture. Our critic should not be surprised because Christian Science differs from him in its interpretations of what constitute correct Scriptural teachings, for there are about one hundred and fifty or more Christian denominations which differ in a greater or less degree.

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
Editorial
Progression
September 6, 1913
Contents

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit