Impersonal Correction

Frequently the editors of the Sentinel and Journal are asked to answer questions in regard to the teachings of Christian Science as applied to given phases of human experience. Generally the editors refer the questioner to his teacher, if he has one, or to an appropriate passage of the text-book, Science and Health, or some other of Mrs. Eddy's writings. Occasionally, the receipt of a number of letters of the same import from different parts of the field shows that there is a need for something to be said editorially which will tend to set right the wavering thought of quite a number who are eagerly and honestly trying to work out their salvation through the demonstration of Christian Science. In these instances, where the correspondence indicates that the questions are asked in good faith and for the purpose of spreading a clearer apprehension of the teachings of Christian Science, the editors endeavor to give the needed explanation through the periodicals, without, however, directly referring to the question which had been asked. This is not only what Mrs. Eddy expected the editors to do, but it is also what she instructed them to do, so that the periodicals might do their share in keeping the teachings of Christian Science unadulterated.

A few months ago several letters were received from different places, indicating that there was considerable misconception extant as to Christian Science treatment. One letter, for instance, mentioned a lady who was told that her hand was an idea of God, and therefore exempt from pain. Because of the manifest sincerity of this correspondent, and because of other letters which had brought up similar questions, the editor asked one of his associates, one of Mrs. Eddy's oldest and most trusted students, to write some editorials which would correct the false impression of Christian Science treatment which these letters indicated was abroad. These editorials appeared in the Journal for December, 1913, and the Sentinel for January 10, 1914. The erroneous views of Christian Science which were condemned in these editorials had never been taught by Mrs. Eddy, as was well known to the editors of the Journal and Sentinel, and it was not supposed by them that such views had been taught by any authorized teacher of Christian Science. They believed that these letters simply put into words some of the various vagrant misconceptions of Christian Science which pass current among many who call themselves Christian Scientists, but who have failed to grasp the true intent of the teachings set forth in Science and Health.

Imagine the editors' surprise, therefore, when letters began to come in which claimed that these editorials were regarded by some as having been written in condemnation of the teachings of a well-known and greatly honored and respected teacher of Christian Science. Their surprise was twofold. In the first place, because they had no teacher in view when the editorials were written, and were not knowingly condemning any teacher or teaching. In the second place, some of the editors had been taught by this teacher, and knew of their own knowledge that he did not teach the manifestly erroneous views of Christian Science which were condemned in these editorials.

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

Truth's Sufficiency
February 7, 1914

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.