Article March 5, 1927 Issue

My attention has just been drawn to two reports of sermons...

Ralph W. Still,

Post-Dispatch

My attention has just been drawn to two reports of sermons that have appeared in your columns in which the teachings of Christian Science are incorrectly set forth, and I would appreciate your courtesy in granting space for correction. In one of these reports a critic states that Christian Science healing is autosuggestive; but anyone who really understands Christian Science knows that as between spiritual therapeutics and suggestion, or hypnotism, there is no agreement whatever. The charge that Christian Scientists utilize suggestive methods in their healing ministry is precisely that which was made against Christ Jesus, who was accused by his enemies of healing the sick through "Beelzebub the prince of the devils;" this designation defining the occult mental methods in vogue in the Master's day, the modern equivalents for "Beelzebub" being suggestive psychotherapy and allied or similar systems, all having an hypnotic or mesmeric basis. However, the Master refuted the accusations of his opponents, and clearly differentiated between "Beelzebub" and his own spiritual practice, through which "the kingdom of God," spiritual harmony, came to those healed. He also pointed out that while one might enjoy relief from physical suffering, or experience a sense of moral cleansing through erroneous methods, the relief was temporary, and "the last state of that man is worse than the first." The explanation of this lies in the fact that systems of healing in which the human mind is regarded as a healing factor, are devoid of the Christ-power, being based on the "carnal mind," which Paul tells us is "enmity against God," instead of on the "mind of Christ;" and as Christian Science practice is wholly spiritual and Christlike, it is self-evident that it has nothing in common with suggestive methods or systems.

The further assertions of our critic that Christian Science teaches that it is only necessary to "deny" sin and sickness in order to be rid of them, and that "all that is needed is Science and Health with an Oxford binding and there will be no evil if you can learn to think it," are, of course, gratuitous, and calculated to excite ridicule. Such assertions betray a lack of comprehension of Christian Science, which teaches nothing shallow or incongruous. A knowledge of Truth is what frees one from error, not mere denial of error. "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." The study and demonstration of the truths taught in "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures," of which Mary Baker Eddy, the Discoverer and Founder of Christian Science, is the author, have brought health, hope, and happiness to a multitude of people who were burdened with sin, sickness, and sorrow; and a scoff at this work is a scoff at teachings that have their basis and inspiration in the sacred Scriptures, as a sincere and careful study will reveal.

In the other report under consideration Christian Scientists are not mentioned specifically, but it is patent that it is they who are referred to as holding that sickness, pain, and suffering are "merely imaginary." Christian Scientists, let it be understood, do not carelessly or unfeelingly say to those in distress that their difficulties are "merely imaginary." What Christian Science teaches in this respect is that all untoward human conditions, whether of sin, sickness, sorrow, disease, or disaster, are unsupported by God, being neither created nor sanctioned by Him; hence that all evil or error is unreal, destructible. And Christian Science heals these miserable phases of human experience through the power of Truth, in substantiation of the correctness of its teachings. That was the test imposed by Christ Jesus on those who would be his followers. As to the use of "earthly means" in healing, Christian Scientists do not condemn others for utilizing whatever means of relief they choose, but they point out that through spiritual means alone one may be healed of any wrong condition, be it ever so severe; so that the defense made by our critic of the use of material means in connection with spiritual healing is inept. The Master gave sight to the blind, restored hearing to the deaf, healed the sick, cleansed the leper—both moral and physical—without material means or physical contact; and he did these things and walked on the water, raised the dead, and fed the multitudes, all through his understanding of God as the sole cause and creator, who needed no "earthly means" to accomplish his beneficent purpose.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

My attention has just been drawn to two reports of sermons...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access