Are you sure?
This bookmark will be removed from all folders and any saved notes will be permanently removed.
Legal opinion: Charles F. Choate, Jr.
Originally published in the 1942 pamphlet “Permanency of The Mother Church and its Manual”
CHOATE, HALL & STEWART
Counselors-at-Law
30 State Street
Boston, Massachusetts
The Christian Science Board of Directors
206 Massachusetts Avenue
Boston, Massachusetts
Dear Lady and Gentlemen:
In reply to your request for my opinion respecting the validity of the contention now [1926] made by certain former members of the Christian Science Church, that the Christian Science Mother Church was dissolved when Mrs. Eddy passed on, or should be dissolved, because her approval cannot be obtained and is required by certain By-Laws, I have given careful consideration to this proposition and beg to advise you as follows.
An examination of a number of documents bearing upon this question, in my opinion, makes it obvious that Mrs. Eddy from an early time intended that the Church which she founded should be a continuing institution and co-existent with the endurance of religious faith among men. She contemplated and intended a Church which would have perpetual existence under the law providing for the organization of religious organizations. See Dittemore v. Dickey, 249 Mass. 95 at 106.
In my judgment, the By-Laws providing for Mrs. Eddy's approval required that approval only so long as it was possible for her to give it and when, by her passing on, it became impossible to obtain that approval, it was intended that such approval should cease to be a condition. There is nowhere any expressed intention on Mrs. Eddy's part that the Church be dissolved or that any term be set to its existence, but it is the consistent intent of the Founder, appearing in many ways and places, that the Church should continue to exist indefinitely. I am of the opinion that there is no foundation whatever for the contention that it was dissolved when Mrs. Eddy passed on or that it should be dissolved now or at any time because her approval cannot now be obtained. See also Eustace v. Dickey, 240 Mass. 55.
Respectfully yours,
Chas. F. Choate, Jr.