Things are not always what they seem to be. In fact, things can be made to appear quite different from what they really are. Christian Scientists and the public have been exposed to a classic example of how evidence can be presented in a way that leads to deep misrepresentations. The misuse of evidence can mislead those who want to know what's true.

This "classic example" came in the form of prosecuting Christian Scientist parents who relied on a spiritual method of treatment instead of the more conventional approach of medical care. The evidence collected by the state assumed the guilt—and was artfully crafted to "prove" the guilt—of the parents. Since the best efforts of the Christian Scientists had not led to success in treatment, this fact added a lot of weight to the presumption of guilt. The prosecution's evidence, when presented selectively and in a calculated way, would make it hard for many to believe anything but that the parents were wrong, that they should have taken a different course of action, that they failed to do what the "reasonable" person would have done.

When one looks at the way a prosecutor can marshal his evidence, it may appear to the public that a verdict of guilt is the only possible conclusion. After all, much if not all of the evidence appears to be simply factual. But consider the "spin" that can be put on a "fact" when a prosecutor deeply disagrees with the course of action chosen by a Christian Scientist. He offers, for instance, indisputable evidence that Christian Scientists don't accept disease as real, falsely suggesting that they simply ignore it. He implies that parents were obviously blinded by religious dogma and therefore really did nothing to care for the child's illness.

The more balanced set of facts, of course, includes the point that Christian Science teaches that illness does not originate in, nor is it sustained by, God, who is Love. Disease doesn't have the kind of reality that Truth sustains. An understanding of this spiritual insight has led to many healings—even of conditions that were determined medically to be incurable. A fuller presentation of the evidence also shows that Christian Scientists do have an established system of healing and are perhaps even more sensitive to a child's illness than those who turn to medicine. It's very easy, however, for a person fashioning evidence in a courtroom, or in the media, to be so caught up in a particular point of view that it becomes very difficult to take fair account of the whole story.

While the foregoing few paragraphs hardly begin even to touch on the kind of injustice that can occur when evidence is misused, such an event can teach us much. And it can serve as an object lesson. The process of accusation, the way evidence is presented from a point of view designed to condemn, the lack of recognition that there may be intelligent, thoughtful people making choices based on honest and prayerful leading, the omission of a whole array of balancing information—all of this can cause justice simply to evaporate.

How often does this happen in our society, in our world? Every one of us, literally on a daily basis, is confronted with evidence. Sometimes the issues we face are major and the evidence is crucial. Is our tendency to react, to let the human mind take the lead in how we feel? Or do we seek out the other fellow's point of view? But even if we are able to accumulate mountains of evidence on each side, is this really enough of an answer?

We can, of course, be grateful when society makes honest efforts to weigh all sides. This is obviously appropriate. It illustrates basic fair-mindedness necessary for the functioning of society. Yet for the Christian Scientist, even more is needed. One reason for aligning ourselves with the Church of Christ, Scientist, is that we feel a deep desire to let God and His reality be supreme in our thought. It is on the basis of making this commitment our true priority that we come closest to real justice in assessing the human scene. Mary Baker Eddy set a healing standard when she affirmed in Miscellaneous Writings, "No evidence before the material senses can close my eyes to the scientific proof that God, good, is supreme."

Mrs. Eddy did not say that she closed her eyes to the material evidence. And yet she, by example, was calling on her followers not to let material evidence close their eyes. Sometimes material evidence does exactly that to us—it virtually shuts our eyes!

Even with massive material evidence, presenting all perspectives, we often find that an outward view of things, of itself, can lead to confusion instead of to drawing proper conclusions. Very good and honest people in our society may sometimes differ—even profoundly. And those differing views may each rest on solid ground when they are understood in the context of each individual's effort to do his best according to his highest sense of right. When these differences become intense, even personal, it's especially important that we clear away prejudices and fears so that they don't become the basis for making assessments.

At least this is vital for the Christian Scientist as he makes various decisions in life. He should have the courage and strength to turn to God before the human mind takes its course. And he should be spiritually-minded enough to take seriously the fact that the Bible's Rule really is Golden: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." If we wish to be judged fairly as Christian Scientists, we'll want to be sure we ourselves are making right judgments.

Of course, it might seem at times much simpler to let human emotion rule. Perhaps it would be easier to let the surface evidence determine how we feel. But the prosecutions Christian Scientists have experienced teach us a solid lesson about the distortions that passionate and prejudiced attitudes can establish. This lesson about the misuse of evidence should be a warning to us. We can hardly afford to fall victim to such misuse when, in other areas of life, we're faced with evaluating evidence. The world will be a better place if we will let God tell us how to think, and trust Him more fully in shaping our views.

Human evidence is sometimes wrongly exploited. Even by good people. And resulting distortions can be misleading about other good people. But there is a safeguard. We can always feel assured that the evidence of God's supremacy is changeless. We can be certain that He is the constant, dependable source of clear and dispassionate thought.

As a result, we may well find ourselves less impressed with material facts and blessed with the kind of deep spiritual insight that enables us to see beyond the surface. We find ourselves reaching to fulfill Christ Jesus' injunction "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment."

Nathan A. Talbot