The February number of The Westminster contains a contribution on Christian Science to which I beg leave to offer some reply, inasmuch as this article does not deal justly with the teaching of Christian Science, but on the contrary misrepresents it.
It is impossible to go about the world, listening to what is being said and reading what is being written about Christian Science, without becoming aware that a vast amount of criticism and prejudice is being aroused by the perpetual reiteration of the statement that its teaching is opposed to what is termed historic Christianity.
During
the study of one of our Lesson-Sermons in which the parable of the sower was most helpfully explained and illumined by passages from Science and Health, the writer felt impelled to relate the following experience in proof of the power of the Word of God to "guide to the divine Principle of all good".
Christian Science
demands of its students that they shall know the truth of being as demonstrable fact, and not merely speculate on or theorize about things pertaining to God.
Since
most people are prone to make mistakes at times, or to be misunderstood and misjudged, there are perhaps few temptations so subtle and insistent as the temptation to revert in thought or conversation to troubles past, or to persecutions "for righteousness' sake," perchance, from which divine Love has delivered or is delivering us.
In
the many problems of business, in matters of statecraft, in the stress and storm of militant conditions, in all the ramifications of effort and endeavor, promptness in execution, preparedness to do, and swiftness in doing, are qualities which the general thought labels "dependable.
The
question is sometimes raised as to the propriety of placing the so-called "Christian Science novels" in the hands of inquirers, or of others unacquainted with the teachings of Christian Science, in preference to our own authorized literature.
I do not question our critic's superficial acquaintance with Christian Science teachings, but I do emphatically deny that he understands these teachings, for the main reason that he does not correctly state them.
