Article June 6, 1925 Issue

I regret to note in your issue of recent date that a gentleman,...

Charles E. Heitman, Committee on Publication for the State of New York,—Schenectady

Union-Star

I regret to note in your issue of recent date that a gentleman, in a recent address delivered in Albany, took occasion to criticize the healing ministry of Christian Science and to classify it with a number of other teachings, religious and otherwise, with which it has nothing in common. For instance, the teachings and practice of Christian Science are as far removed from the mesmeric modes of mental therapy to which the doctor refers as were the precepts and practices of Jesus himself. As the doctor well knows, all phases of hypnotic healing are based upon the belief in many minds and the power of one mind over another; whereas, Christian Science, like the divine theology of Jesus, is based upon the demonstrable fact that there is but one Mind, infinite and divine, called God, even that Mind which, according to the Apostle Paul, "was also in Christ Jesus." It should be remembered by those Christians who attempt to criticize and depreciate healing by spiritual means, that in so doing they are renouncing the definite promises and instructions of the great Teacher, whom they profess to follow. Jesus, it will be recalled, specifically commanded his followers to heal the sick, and plainly said, "These signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; ... they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." While no Christian Scientist would, of course, claim to have attained to that measure of understanding which enabled the Master to do his mighty works, yet it must be said that adherents of this religion are to-day reproducing in a most encouraging manner the works of the Master, healing the sick and reforming the sinner in the way pointed out by him. Perhaps the doctor is not aware that the highly satisfactory results which have followed the practical application of Christian Science treatment to the healing of disease, over a period of more than half a century, have been recognized and publicly acknowledged by prominent and honored members of both the ministerial and the medical profession. As an example, no less an authority than Dr. Richard C. Cabot of Boston has said: "That Christian Science has done and is doing a vast deal of good, not only as a religion, but as a health restorer and a protest against the short-sighted naturalism of the doctors, we are firmly convinced. Its affirmations are helpful to thousands."

In view of the fact that our critic especially reminded his audience that he was speaking as a member of a much respected Christian denomination, the following statement by the Bishop of Kensington takes on added interest: "Why do not we heal the sick in Christ's name as did the early church? It is to find an answer to that question that I ventured to suggest this conference to-day. And in my invitation I drew your attention to the challenge which the action of that body of Christians called Christian Scientists makes. It is to me indisputable that they do heal the sick both in body and mind. That notable miracles have been wrought by them we cannot deny. It is idle to dismiss the evidence in an offhand spirit of incredulity, still less to be 'offended' because the work of healing is being done in Christ's name by those who follow not with us. We must, rather, thankfully hail the guidance which such experience supplies as a means of recovering that truth which has either been neglected or overlaid by us."

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

I regret to note in your issue of recent date that a gentleman,...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access