Article March 8, 1930 Issue

A clergyman refers in his article to Christian Science as a...

Charles W. J. Tennant, District Manager of the Committees on Publication for Great Britain and Ireland,—London

Evening Standard

A clergyman refers in his article to Christian Science as a "quaint American superstition." It matters not which definition of the word "superstition" is taken, it is not applicable to Christian Science. That which is based on divine Principle and is capable of proof cannot be superstition.

How does the clergyman suppose Christ Jesus would define Christianity? Surely as the practice of the teachings that he laid down some two thousand years ago. This is precisely what Christian Science claims to be. It is self-evident that there is something wrong when those who profess to be Christians do not bring forth the signs which the Founder of Christianity said should follow them that believe. The clergyman belongs to a church which has confessed that it has neglected the healing work of the early Christian church, and that it ought to be restored.

We presume "science" to him means what is termed natural science—knowledge of the physical world. He is therefore quite right in saying that Christian Science is no more a "combination of [his sense of] Christianity and [his sense of] Science than a cockroach is a cross between a barndoor fowl and a fish." It is something quite different.

Enjoy 1 free Sentinel article or audio program each month, including content from 1898 to today.

Send a comment to the editors
NEXT IN THIS ISSUE
Article
My attention has been called to your editorial of November 27...
March 8, 1930
Contents

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit