Article November 7, 1925 Issue

Christian Scientists agree fully with the writer of "Health Talks"...

Thomas C. Hollingshead, Committee on Publication for the State of Idaho,—Boise

Statesman

Christian Scientists agree fully with the writer of "Health Talks" when, in a recent edition of the Statesman, he says that "vaccination is purely a personal matter." It is surely reasonable to state that the danger, from the medical standpoint, is not to the "well vaccinated" adherent of the vaccination theory, but to the one who believes he has found a system of protection which is better than the old beliefs of his ancestors. The adherent of Christian Science has discarded the use of medicine and employs in all cases of illness a system whose results have justified him in his choice, otherwise the family physician would be quickly recalled; for one does not change his ideas as to the desirability of enjoying good health on adopting Christian Science. The Christian Scientist is also in full sympathy with this writer when as in a previous "talk" he says: "The tricky method by which vaccination is made practically compulsory in some communities is a thing the health authorities should be ashamed of. I mean the scheme which arranges one law to compel attendance at school and another to exclude the child that is not vaccinated."

But the writer in his more recent "talk" leaves an impression which is unjust and very unfair to Christian Science and to those who are striving to live in accord with its teaching. Christian Scientists are not unmindful of the duty they owe their neighbors, and are careful not to expose these neighbors to anything which the latter would consider harmful. They are taught carefully to look after and correct their ailments through Christian Science treatment, and a suspicion of infection or contagion is considered to be sufficient reason for calling a licensed physician to diagnose and report such a case to the public health authorities. No one following the teachings of Christian Science would be guilty of visiting the home of one who should, under the laws of the community, be under strict quarantine, and then going directly to a public place. That is not practicing Christian Science; and surely one who does not follow the precepts of Christian Science should not be designated a Christian Scientist, nor should Christian Science be held responsible for those who disregard its teachings.

The writer does not give as his opinion that Christian Scientists are not careful of the rights of others or are not law-abiding in this respect, but he quotes the statement from a supposed letter from one of his correspondents. It would, however, have been far more worthy on his part to have denied the allegation, for his experience must have long since convinced him that Christian Scientists are more than ordinarily careful in these respects. These misstatements of Christian Science and the attitude of its adherents, which appear from time to time in the public press, are not always attacks or willful attempts to injure this great Cause, but they are ever affording opportunities, as Mrs. Eddy has pointed out, "to correct in a Christian manner impositions on the public in regard to Christian Science" (Church Manual, p. 97). They are also reminders to the Christian Scientist that it is his duty to love and to forgive at all times those who would ridicule or seek to injure him.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

Christian Scientists agree fully with the writer of "Health Talks"...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access