Editorial February 26, 1916 Issue

Mental Trespass

Archibald McLellan

It is surely commendable, and wise withal, that the Christian Science practitioner should endeavor in his treatment of the sick to be governed by the rules of practice laid down by Mrs. Eddy. Throughout her writings there is a gentle insistence that the golden rule shall govern the proceedings of her followers,—not alone their outward conduct, but that inward action for which, though hidden from the sight of men, there must sooner or later come an accounting. It was the rule by which her own life was ordered, and she knew that therein lay peace and safety to all concerned.

In most instances where there seems to have been a turning aside from the strict letter and spirit of the teachings of Christian Science, it has plainly come from either ignorance or misunderstanding. What, for example, could be clearer than this statement: "For a student of mine to treat another student without his knowledge, is a breach of good manners and morals; it is nothing less than a mistaken kindness, a culpable ignorance, or a conscious trespass on the rights of mortals"? (Miscellaneous Writings, p. 283.) It is twenty years since Mrs. Eddy gave this teaching to her followers, yet not infrequently instances of promiscuous mental treatment come to light that show an almost inexcusable ignorance of it. We hear of members giving unsolicited treatment to the readers and other officials of the church, of teachers treating the pupils in their classes without their knowledge or consent, and even of a concerted effort of this kind on the part of a group of overzealous workers.

Just where or how this mistaken practice came into vogue no one seems to know, but wherever found it should be lovingly yet firmly rebuked. That there is no authority for it in Mrs. Eddy's writings is certain. There could not be, in fact, on the basis of the golden rule, the touchstone by which the sincerity of one's purpose may always be tested. No one who wishes to preserve inviolate his own mental dwelling, even as he guards his home or place of business from trespassers, will himself commit a breach of the moral law against invasion of another's mentality. Surely it is the more reprehensible to attempt to act in the capacity of a self-appointed regulator of our neighbor's thoughts, when we would not presume to adopt a similar course in regard to his office!

Send a comment to the editors

NEXT IN THIS ISSUE

Editorial

Knowledge and Expression