The Other Side

CHARLES D. REYNOLDS

Manchester (N. H.) Union

Mr. Editor.

The incident related by Mr. Chalmers of a physician who told the patient that he must die, and received in reply the statement that he was well and strong and would be out in a few days, is certainly to the point. On which side is our friend's sympathy? that of the doctor who, according to material law, condemned the patient to death? or that of the patient, who resisted this decree and affirmed his immortality and divine sonship?

Which was contending for the law of Christ? the doctor or the patient? The patient trusted in the law of life in Christ Jesus to free him from the law of sin and death (materialism), whereas the doctor was unconsciously trying to fasten disaster and death upon his patient. Jesus brought a more hopeful gospel than that, and proved that victory over sickness, sin, and death, is possible to man. To Lazarus he said, "Come forth." To the material senses this was absurd, it was "ignoring the physical strength of the patient."

Mr. Chalmers would doubtless explain that it was not the human mind either of Lazarus or of Jesus that raised the patient, but the divine Mind, and here he is in accord with Christian Science. Jesus said, "The Father that dwelleth in me, He doeth the works." Christian Science has been gradually coming before the public for more than a quarter of a century. If the ground upon which it is to be rejected is no stronger than is here represented, the public naturally asks what there is about this subject that it should be so frequently mentioned from the pulpit. It is well, therefore, that our friend has divulged his purpose in speaking thus apologetically of Christian Science, That he hoped to divert the thoughts of his congregation from this religion.

Religious instructors should take into account the fact that mortals are sorely pressed with sin and disease, and in their extremity seek relief, and will go where they find it. Our friend argues that there is no distinction between medicine and food. Jesus, however, made a distinction, and so does our common law.

Christianity is scientific, else the Master was unscientific and his teachings and demonstrations no infallible guide. To him Christianity was no more designed to have man sick and die than it was to have the sinner lost. Its mission is to save.

I have never known a man who understood Christian Science sufficiently to make an accurate statement of it that did not at the same time firmly believe in it.

On the other hand, one who cannot make an accurate and impartial statement of it should not be expected to believe in it, neither should he be expected to preach against it. I have some personal experience on this point, for I began to investigate Christian Science with the one view of preaching a sermon. I thought that in two or three weeks I would be amply prepared to speak authoritatively on this topic to my congregation. The three weeks extended into nine or ten months and still I felt incompetent to speak and tell the public just what Christian Science is. When Copernicus discovered the true order of the stellar system the whole world was against him and his discovery. It contradicted the evidence of the senses; but Copernicus discovered a truth and it lives. Likewise Christian Science is a discovery, and the individual opinions of those who think it contradicts some of our traditional teachings have no weight. Many thousands are testifying that it has lifted them out of sickness into health, out of unbelief into faith. Our good brother can surely join us in praise to God who has given such gifts to men.

CHARLES D. REYNOLDS. In Manchester (N. H.) Union.

Send a comment to the editors

NEXT IN THIS ISSUE

Article

Love of Truth its Foundation

March 14, 1903

Contents

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit