Article March 28, 1914 Issue

In a recent issue of your paper there is a statement made...

Frederick Dixon—London, England

T. P.'s Weekly

In a recent issue of your paper there is a statement made with respect to broken limbs and healing by various mental methods. In this paragraph Christian Science is mentioned; will you, therefore, let me explain what the attitude of Christian Science with respect to broken bones really is. The writer of the paragraph put the matter very fairly, I think, from a general point of view, in the comment he inserts in his article, but that comment needs some explanation from the point of view of Christian Science. This religion teaches emphatically that broken bones can be healed without surgical aid, and it bases this statement on the fact that all material phenomena are in reality mental effects. If this is so, and it is the teaching of all the idealism of natural science, then a splint, like a drug, is merely a clumsy method of inducing the human mind to effect the change. It is obvious, therefore, that as perception of mental causation grows, the drug and the splint will alike be eliminated. Homeopathy has already, to a large extent, eliminated the drug, and modern medicine is doing away with it more and more. The difference, then, between surgery and medicine is solely one of degree, and it is simply a question of educating the human mind to an acceptance of facts. Berkeley proposed tar water as a universal panacea, yet on his own showing tar water was only a mental argument to convince the human mind.

The teaching of Christian Science pushes home the teaching of the idealism of natural science to its logical conclusion. In doing this it eventually separates itself entirely from natural science, inasmuch as it eschews suggestion, will-power, et hoc genus omne, declares that these things are part of a belief in a material mind, and are themselves just as much unrealities as are material phenomena. It insists that the only power is divine Mind, and that a perception of this enables the demonstration of healing to be made on the lines insisted upon by the Founder of Christianity himself.

The ordinary man still prefers to go to a surgeon. To him Christian Science says, Go to a surgeon if you desire to have the bone set, and leave the destruction of the pain and inflammation and such things to the Christian Scientist. That was the advice, speaking generally, of Mrs. Eddy, but this does not affect the fact that Christian Science can, under proper conditions, heal broken limbs without a resort to surgical aid. Permit me to give a practical example of this. A month or two ago an accident occurred which resulted in a broken arm. The doctors who were attending the case set the bone several times but were quite unsuccessful in getting it to knit. After some weeks of failure they declared that another operation was necessary. The arm, they insisted, must be opened and the bone wired, this being, in their opinion, the only possible way to induce the bone to knit. Those responsible, however, declined to submit to the operation. They took the risk of what the doctors declared would be the inevitable result, namely, the arm being rendered useless for life, and fell back on Christian Science treatment. Within a few days the bone began to knit. In a week or two the arm was completely healed and is now just as perfect and as useful as the other. Here is an actual example of Christian Science bone-setting which is worth a considerable amount of mere theory.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

In a recent issue of your paper there is a statement made...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access