The article in a recent illustrates the present-day tendency to make broad statements of personal opinion which cannot be supported by facts, and therefore can produce no result except to mislead the public and convey erroneous impressions where the truth can be easily ascertained.
Although the word blasphemous has been used before in support of strongly felt but ill-considered reasons for disapproval, your recent editorial headed "A Blasphemous Slur" must have put this epithet into a new setting.
A gentleman of Passaic asks, in a recent issue, "How can Christian Scientists report cases of contagious disease when no medical man is called to diagnose disease?
It is regrettable that any one should consider it necessary to go into the press to misrepresent doctrines with which he does not agree, but which are cherished by a large number of his fellow citizens.
When a person who can write the word Reverend before his name, advertises an attack on Christian Science and uses such language as you have just reported, the probability is that the Christian Science church of that vicinity is growing.
The
belief, based upon material evidence, that the elements can interfere with God's ideas, is daily and hourly proved to be erroneous by the student of Christian Science.
