After reading in a recent issue of the Chronicle of the attack on Christian Science by a doctor of divinity, I desire to state a few facts and ask a few questions in their defense.
Probably a great many newspaper readers—and certainly the vast majority of those who are addicted to the reading of sensational newspapers—will be surprised to learn that in their reading they have a public duty to perform.
When
I first began to read Science and Health, and attempted to think along Christian Science lines, there seemed to be a sharp conflict between all that I had previously been taught and believed, and the teachings of Christian Science.
Christian Scientists do not deny that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, but they accept the Master's own statements: "I and my Father are one:" "My Father is greater than I;" "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
With reference to the editorial comments as to the cure of locomotor ataxia through Christian Science, it should be stated that Christian Scientists do not claim that a cure is effected through their treatment in every case, for they have not yet learned how to apply the Principle of this Science with such certainty as to avoid an occasional failure; but they have satisfied themselves through investigation and their own personal experiences that there have been many cases of permanent cures of such diseases through their system of healing, and they have abundant confidence that similar results can be secured in other cases through the same method of treatment.
I do not decry, nor do I in the lightest way oppose, the gifts of healing; but I do say they are very meager, and poor, small, starving gifts, as we see them and use them to-day.
