Editorial July 29, 1916 Issue

No Real Resistance to Truth

William D. McCrackan

What is this apparently instinctive resistance to truth so often exhibited by human beings? Why is there seeming need for sad experience and for the trials of time? The Jews, for example, both ignorantly and maliciously labored to reverse the healing of the man born blind by reviling him and finally casting him out. Christian Scientists observe similar attacks made upon their healing works. Whence do such strange and evil efforts spring? Let us put this resistance to the test and unmask the hidden methods lying latent in mortal consciousness.

Tell the proverbial man on the street, wholly uninstructed in Christian Science, of a case of physical healing by this spiritual method and what will be the probable result? He will most likely deny the healing altogether. It may be that politeness will prevent him from uttering this denial, but at least he will be inclined to think it. This is done instinctively by mortals, but this instinct proceeds from the supposititious arch evil which induces the denial; namely, from that counterfeit of the divine Mind which Mrs. Eddy has so aptly termed mortal mind, and which Jesus without circumlocution called a liar. It is original sin, or the belief of life in matter, alias mortal mind, which thus speaks its denial of truth through the persona or mask of a mortal; therefore the scientific Christian is not surprised at this attempted maneuver of reversal. He recognizes that it springs from the very nature of supposititious fundamental evil. He is aware of the intent of mortal mind to save itself and its works by denying the potency of Truth, and he handles this error of so—called reversal with certainty by realizing God's omnipotence.

But we have not yet finished with our hypothetical man on the street. There is apparently also a maneuver number two. Desirous of persuading him that Christian Science does indeed heal the sick, and feeling that some effort should be made to put him in possession of this invaluable fact, we hasten to supply him with such evidence of the healing as would be conclusive before any court of law. What will be the next move which original sin will try to induce him to make? Will it not urge him to say, or at least to think, that the disease is not really healed, but will return; that the patient will have a relapse? Thus maneuver number two is unmasked, that maneuver which in the parlance of war is called a counter—attack and in the nomenclature of metaphysical evil figures as the attempted return of a false claim.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

No Real Resistance to Truth

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access