Article January 1, 1927 Issue

In an editorial printed in a recent issue of your paper under...

Frank J. Linsley, Committee on Publication for the State of Connecticut,—Bridgeport

Post

In an editorial printed in a recent issue of your paper under the caption "Slightly Inconsistent," two editorials in The Christian Science Monitor were mentioned: one as advocating obedience to the prohibition law and as a strong aid in its reinforcement, the other as scoffing at the medical profession for insisting on obedience to the health regulations. The Monitor is entirely consistent in upholding the law prohibiting the use of alcoholic liquor and in opposing medical laws compelling the injection of vaccine virus into the human system, the effects of both having caused untold suffering. We fail to find wherein the editorial referred to "scoffs at the medical profession," in quoting exact statements from papers published in Chicago and England, telling of the treatment received by Dr. Frederick Axham, of London, at the hands of the General Medical Council, which refused to correct a proved mistake by restoring to him his rights in the practice of medicine.

Reference is made in your editorial to laws concerning compulsory vaccination. Christian Scientists are not alone in their objection to this, as there is a constantly increasing public demand that such practice be discontinued, and the medical profession itself is divided on the question. In sixteen states there is no compulsory vaccination law; and in England a "conscientious objections" clause has been in operation during the last twenty-five years, permitting parents to have their children excused from vaccination. Every Christian Scientist worthy of the name is a strict observer of all the laws of the land. Instances are reported where health officers have expressed their thanks to Christian Science practitioners and parents who reported cases of diseases deemed contagious. A prominent health officer in Connecticut has said that "Christian Scientists will fight for their rights but will obey the laws." In her book "The First Church of Christ, Scientist, and Miscellany" (pp. 219, 220) Mrs. Eddy writes: "Rather than quarrel over vaccination, I recommend, if the law demand, that an individual submit to this process, that he obey the law, and then appeal to the gospel to save him from bad physical results. Whatever changes come to this century or to any epoch, we may safely submit to the providence of God, to common justice, to the maintenance of individual rights, and to governmental usages. This statement should be so interpreted as to apply, on the basis of Christian Science, to the reporting of a contagious case to the proper authorities when the law so requires. When Jesus was questioned concerning obedience to human law, he replied: 'Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's,' even while you render 'to God the things that are God's.'"

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

In an editorial printed in a recent issue of your paper under...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access