The Sunday Oregonian., December 06, 1908, Section Five, Page 3, Image 47

THIS SUSDAT OKEGOMAX..PORTLAXD, DECE.MBKR 6, 1908.
t
EMMANUEL MOVEMENT AND CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
How the Two Differentiate in Essential
Principles, from the Christian Scien
tist's Point of View
This Is the first of a series of
three articles by Alfred Farlow,
General Committee on Publication
of the Christian Science organiza
tion. His discussion will be con
cluded with two more articles to
be published on successive Sun
days. Mr. Farlow speaks with
aothorlty for Christian Scientists.
IN TURKU PARTS: PART I.
CARCEI-Y a public declaration has
been made on the subject of the
new psychological system of treat
ing the nick called the Emmanuel Move.
nient that has not contained criticisms
'f Christian Soignee and the practice of
Christian Scientists. Chief among these
are the fetlowing: That Christian Scren
t'sts attempt the cure of organic dis
eases; that Christian Scientists, except In
the treatment of surgical and contusions
ch-s. "discard the employment of physl
cians"-; that Christian Scientists believe
that God Is good andv the only creator
and made nothing unlike himself and
tnat therefor-" "disease is unreal"; that
Christian Science as compared with the
Kmmanuel Movement is neither "Chris
tina nor scientific": that Christian Scien
tists accept a fee for their service. It
is certainly right ami fair that Chris
tion Science be understood as irjs and
that since strangers to Christian Sci
ence have attempted and failed to draw
a clear line of demarcation between
Christian Science and other systems of
treating the sick which differ therefrom,
and have therefore left the subject in a
confused state this distinction be drawn
by a Christian Scientist.
It will be our endeavor to show that
the foundation of Christian Science, its
ta-"hins concerning Cod and his crea
tion, is Christian and scientific. and
therefore that Its conclusions are Chris
tian, for. whatever else may be said of
li. Christian Science is consistent, and
it honors God beyond comparison. If
critics find no fault with the good things
it .loaches about Ood. they should not
. complain when It logically and consist
ently reaches the conclusion therefrom
mat the devil, evil, is neither personal
nor real. Mrs. Kddy does not believe
Iti the asserted power of evil, and -she
has taught her students how to over
come its deceptions by being awake to
Its subtlety and by knowing that God
is. the only power. '
Itevlval of Christina Healing.
Rev. Frank U Plmlen. of New Bed
ford. Mass., In an address delivered In
that city on October 4. 1SOS. gave the
"following very sensible reasons for the
revival of Christian healing. He said:
"I'ntll a comparatively recent date the
church lost sight of the fact that the
Founder of Christianity was not only
a revealer ami proclainier of the trutb.
but also h healer of the Ills of humanity,
both physical and mental. Jesus not
only preached the truth, but he healed
the sick. The first teachers of Christi
anity followed the double practice of
preaching and healing. Jesus healed
physical and mental maladies, not mere
ly because he understood and brought
to bear supernatural power, but rather .
because he saw and laid hold of those
latent powers In humanity which others
had failed to see and utilize. The. heal
In jMwer of Jesus is not something
that came into the world with him and
departed with him. it Is a permanent pos
sibility to nil those who have sufficient
insight and faith and sagacity to grasp
and utilise the same power."
A careful study of the Scriptures dis
closes the fact that healing the sick was
by no means the result for which the
"Muster primarily labored: it was rather
a conseqimnce of the spiritual regenera
tion which was effected by the Gosiwl
he preached. Christian Science accords
with our Lord's teaching, when he said.
"Whether is It easier to say thy sins
be forgiven thee or to say. rise up and
walk." end when he declared to an
other whom he had healed. "Sin no more
1-st a worse thing come upon thee." He
thus taught unquestionably that disease
Is the result of sin. He did not on these
occasions mention any particular sin or
enter into a comprehensive definition of
sin. but the Scriptures, as a whole, war
rant the dettnition of sin which is taught
In Christian Science, namely, that It in
cludes not only the willful wrongs of
mortals but all of their Ignorant mis
takes and blunderings. John said: "All
unrighteousness (all unrlght-wls-ness. all
unripht-wise-ness is sin.' that is. all
erroneous beliefs and conceptions which
are held as wLsilom. ail mistakes which
are regarded as "wNcness" are Included
under he name sir., and it is quite evi
dent that unrighteous thought", is the
basis of all evil conduct, for thought is
always prior to action. The Master held
this opinion of the f undanicntality of
sinful thought, as is indicated by his
declaration that those who look upon sii:
to desire it are guilty of its offense.
It Is proper to say in this connection
tl at the double practice of preaching
and healing was due to tiie fact that It
was lnios.Mble to benent an individual
spiritually without improving his bod
ily condition. It would be quite as Im
possible for one to understand and live
and talk according to the. Gospel of
Truth without benefitting oneself and
others as It woutd be for the sun to
shine without dispelling the darkness.
'Thus we note that healing the sick In
the Christian Science Church is not an
adjunct to lt religious prartice but a
natural, inevitable consequence of the
new and more definite, comprehensive
and Christlike understanding of God and
his creation which is taught by Mrs.
Kddy. This constitutes the foundation of
the entire system of Christian Scienc"
and Its practice, and It destroys both
sin and sickness, it is the trutli which
Illumines the consciousness of the pa
tient and destroys his sense of disease.
The Rev. F. C. Baker, of Fairhaven.
lass.. In referring to "Recent develop
ments In the field of religious ethics."
d-elarrs. "It is. perhaps, the latest phase
of that more than general awakening to
the fact that the Church of Christ ha
a mission to the whole man, body and
soul." May we add here that the heal
ing movements which are being insti
tuted in the churches are. to say the
-irt. prompted by an acknowledgement
of the Scriptural teacning. that healing
the sick is an essential feature of Chris
tian practh-e. This point having been
s.'tlled. it remains to discover the Christ
method. We think all will agree that
real Christian results can be had only
by the means which our Lord employed,
viz.. by an unreserved reliance upon God.
If we may assume that human psychol
ogy shall furnish the way of Christian
healing on the supposition that "God
made psychology." we may consistently
go to the length of assuming that every
ma:i should be a liberal drinker of whis
ky on the supposition that "God made it."
The spiritual science of God reveals the
fact that both psychology and whisky,
which, by the way. we are not compar
ing, are of human invention, and ex
perience teaches that absolute purity of
thought and life, demands a sacrifice of
both. Solomon admonished, "Pull not
-upon yourselves destruction with the
works of your hands." Rather than de
clare that human methods are gifts of
God. we should awake to the fact that
they are misappropriations.
Turning now to the Emmanuel Move
ment, we find that the motive for Us
....... .. - t
. -'ZSJ&s tt:t hp I it' r 1 c rinl! 1
2 f fi.-r----' ,' rp- o-I Af v :
f . J?!T-45ir f--t- i ' . .Jt 1 r ii i Its I K , II
-V f u i - I j i - -f ?cf ? 1 1 ? irr I p r? f . , , ns t t
i I -irbr -"?ns I '5- lis 'ls ? I y hJi' wln fi-fl-5 vt x
"n" m iniwaitw'i'iwfVisiiiiiT "
establishment, as stated by Its founders.
was to supply a demand for "non-drug
healing." The following quotation from
Ir. H. M. Wells, of Philadelphia, Is rep
resentative nt the many we have seen on
this subject.' "Recently the suggestion
has been made that the Christian Church
enter the field of psycho-therapeutics.
and thus meet the demand that appar
ently exists In the minus of the people
for the healing influences of religion. It
Is hoped by this means to offset the ef
fects of Christian Science." "To offset"
the good works of another body of Chris
tian people does not seem to be a very
exalted purpose, but.w'e shall not com-
Dlain on this account, for we are quite
sure that as the churches approach scien
tific healing, whatayer Is wanting in their
motive may be easily corrected.
There seems to be a division or opin
ion regarding the Importance, usefulness
and advisability of this new movement.
One writer declares that "this latest coun
terfeit probably had Its conception and
birth In the fear of doctors of losing their
patients and of pastors of losing their
mcmbars. Says another: ma Em
manuel movement is one of the most-
talked-of projects among churchmen to
day. It is being used in Boston to com
bat Christian Science." We do not un
derstand whether the affirma-tion that
this movement is a return to "primitive
Christianity" or a revival of "historic
Christianity" refers to the means and
methods employed, or whether it Is In
tended to apply simpty to the abstract
proposal to revive "non-drug healing." If
we were to undertake to justify the move
ment by Scriptural authority.- we should
have to concern ourselves not only with
the proposition that Jesus and the apos
tles healed the sick, but also wiith the
method of healing which they used. We
should seek a knowledge of the Christ
means of overcoming human ills.
In an address made at Rochester on
May 2. 1S"S. Dr. McComb declared that
the Kmmanuel Movement "Is an out
come of the fact that jesus -nrisi
healed the sick."' and that "Christ was
not averse io taking advantage of means
provided by nature and man In his day."
Respecting this It must be said that Jesus
was truly human and moved among men.
but he had as little part In material
things as it was possible for one upon
this plane to have, and as he advanced InJ
understanding he relied more and more
upon Spirit until finally he parted from
material conditions limitations altogeth-J
er. lr. McComb has declared mat tne
Savior would have been willing to tak?
advantage of the advancements of this
age!" Following this line of argument.
heholds that "spiritual healing must go
hand in hand, co-operating with and
sometimes supplementing medical sci
ence." He even goes so far as to ad
vance the speculative opinion that If
Jesus were present in this age he would
work hand in hand with the doctors, that
he would employ a medical diagnostician
to examine the cases which applied to
him for help. and. if by this means it
were discovered that persons were af
flicted organically he would reject them.
tit If he learned that they had only
functional difficulties lie would accept
them as patients!
Uf r against" all this suggestion, how
ever, is the significant fact that JesusJ
healed most or his patients instantane
ously, and that he cured the most dif
ficult cases In much less time than
would have been required even to sum
mon a physician, to say nothing about
tedious and painful examinations. If the
Master had b?en a failure in the treat
ment of disease. If facts could be named
In evidence that he succeeded only with
functional disorders while he failed to
cure organic cases then there might be
some ground for affirming that. If now
upon the earth, he would need and util
ize modern medical practice: but when
we remember tlat )ie healed the most
difficult tases instantaneously and that
he never lost a case: that he cleansed
the leper, raised the dead, while the dally
failures even of the most approved med
ical means may be counted by the thou
sands. . we may well ask: Is it reason
able to suppose tiiat the Master "would
have been glad" to-se aside his perfect
system of curing the sick in order to
avail himself o a method which fre
quently and lamentably fails? It would
seem that any Christian minister would
Wush to assume that either modern or
ancient medical diagnosis gives a better
statement of the cause of dlseave than
that expressed by Christ Jesus when he-l
said. "Sin no more, lest a worse thing
come unto thee," and when he referred
to the woman probably afflicted with
rheumatism as tone whom "Satan hath
bruind, lo! these eighteen years." Our
Lord treated these cases on the assump
tion that sin and not a material cause
was the foundation of their affliction,
and with far better success than any
modern physician.
A this point it is legitimate to inquire
what particular advantage over the Apos
tolic means and methods is to be found
In the Emmanuel Movement, either as
regards organic or contagious disorders.
Jesus' remedy was always at hand. He
was able to call it into action Instantly
and without being encumbered with a
medical case or the expense of diag
nostician. His method was entirely safe
In handling contagion, because he in
stantly healed his patients and thus re
moved all occasion for danger. In an ad
dress given In London, England, Dr. Mc
Comb declared, however, that In the an
cient days "there were two species of
leprosy, one that was contagious and one
that was not contagious, and this prob
ably accounts for the fact that Jesus per
mitted his leprous cases to mingle with
the public." He has suggested further
that these cases were probably of the
non-contagious type! Such an argument
belittles the omnipotent power of our
Lord, and would discourage the feeble
and fluttering faith In God which exists
in the modern Christian world. Men have
occasion to toe thankful that Christian
Science has saved the Bible from doubt
and infidelity, and lias already prepared
Jt"hTl'xm - Uf mA m
TEMPLE OF FIRST CHIHCH OF CHRIST, SCIENTIST, PORTLAIVD, AS IT
the world against such a travesty on the
teaching and practice of the Master, for
It has healed thousands of cases of or
ganic and so-called contagious troubles.
Dr.' McDonald, of Brooklyn treats this
question somewhat differently. He says:
"Because Christ drew no line between
functional and organic maladies Is no rea
son I should not. I compliment him more
when I draw the line than when I wander
all over the Held. That drawing of the
line shows that I consider him a bigger
man than I am. He was perfect." This
is quite a sane point, but the gentleman
should have reasoned further. The facts
In evidence lead to the conclusion that
not only was the Master perfect, but
that his method was perfect also. It Is
manifest that even a perfect man could
not reach a desired destination If he fol
lowed a wrong course. We honor the in
dividual who recognizes that he must
"suffer to be so now" usages and prac
tices which the perfect man may elim
inate, but there is no excuse for the effort
made by some of the substitute modern
phychology for primitive Christianity un
der the apology that the only reason why
Jesus troubled himself with the tedious
method of utilizing divine power in de
stroying sin and sickness, rather than
avail himnelf of the modern method of
preparing pills and plasters ana entering
into a diagnosis which sometimes con
sumes days, was that these modern con
veniences were not in existence. and
hence not available in his time. After all,
the Important question is as to. whether
the modern methods are superior to our
Lord's and we know of no better rule by
which this question .may be decided, in
this or in any age. than the test: "By
their fruits ye shall know them." Jesus
and his disciples furnished the Important
tiling, namely, good results.
Furthermore, if Christ Jesus and his
apostles were living in this age and were
to refer those who are organically afflict
ed back to the physicians who have failed
to cure them, that would certainly fail to
demonstrate the fullness and infinitude of
divine power, and the mission would in
so far be defeated. In the efforts to fol
low Christ Jesus and heal the sick, men
and women today do indeed fall far short
of the perfect understanding and applica
tion of divine power, but the remedy Is
not to resort to an insufficient substitute,
but to strive the more earnestly to know
and utilize the perfect wy. The remedy
is not to bring our Lord down to the level
of those who are compelled to depend
upon material remedies because they do
not understand how to avail themselves
of the spiritual, but to plant ourselves un
reservedly upon the possibility of an ef
fective faith in and reliance upon God.
and by our sufficient striving, to attain
to the exalted position which was occu
pied by our Great Elxemplar.
Rev. Albert B. Shield, rector of the
Church of the Redeemer. Boston, an ad
vocate of the Kmmanuel Movement, In
an address given In Hartford. Conh., on
May 3. 190S. declared that "The Old
Testament prophets were psycho-therapeutists
while Christ was the greatest
of all." "We assume, because of the con
nection In which the gentleman makes
this declaration, that he means to de
clare that Jesus was nothing more tnan
a practitioner of mental suggestion,
according to the modern system: that
he did not heal by the direct power of
God but through the medium of human
will, and yet the master said In his
prayer: "Not as 1 will, but as thou
wilt." He declared: "the words that I
speak unto you I spiak not of myself,
but the father that worketh in me, he
doeth the works." If we mistake not
the Christian world will not object to
having the word 'psycho-therapeutics"
or "healing by human will power," Ap
plied to the exalted and purely spiritual .
methods of Christ Jesus.
In the book "Religion and Medicine"
K LIFE NOT WITIIOIT
'.'S CH Alt-US FOR RICH
aiAA'S WIFE.
-v
" it
f 1
5 -
Mrs. Alfred G. Vanderbilt.
NEW YORK. Dec. 5. (Spe
cial.) Mrs. Alfred G. Vander
bilt. who obtained a divorce not
long ago. seems to be finding
single life enjoyable. She Is seen
a great deal in public and re
cently was in a box at a show
opposite one occupied by her
former husband. They did not
speak. "Mrs. Vanderbilt's name -haa.
been associated with, those
of several men, but her friends
believe her fancy free.
4
k SIN. I
i.
---.
j; :r ,.
: 1 '
t '
t
I . V?
4 s '
i .i s.
I
i
compiled by Drs. "Worcester. McComb
and Coriat. and which, for the sake of
convenience we shall credit to Dr.
Worcester a further reason for the
Emmanuel Movement Is " suggested,
namely, that "The metaphysical basis of
Christian Science Is too crude, too con
tradictory, to be accepted by the normal
reason," though he adds that "With all
its obscurity we find in the Sacred Boole
of Chilstian Science great truths."
Either the doctor must be laboring
under a misapprehension, or else by
"normal reason" he means the peculiar
Interpretations of personal sense, since
otherwise he could not have made this
declaration. The metaphysical basis of
Christian Science is the metaphysical
basis of Scriptural "teaching. The Scrip
tures admonish us to compare "spiritual
things with spiritual." for "It Is ,the
spirit that quickeneth. the flesh proft
eth nothing." Tha Master placed no re
lfance whatever upon matter. He
brushed it aside completely by declar
ing it to be altogether unprofitable, and
It is certainly true that his teaching
that God is spirit, and the teachlne of
Christian Science -which Is based entire
ly thereupon do not conflict, nor does
any part of Christian Science contradict
any other part. Every statement con
tained in the Christian Science textbook
Is consistent with every other state
ment contained therein, and no state
ment contained therein is contradictory
to anything but material sense, that
which our Lord affirmed to be unpro
fitable, not to be credited even In the
smallest degree.
It is averred by critics that mental
suggestion has been employed In some
fortrfor other during all the ages of the
world and that long before Mrs. Eddy
"launched Christian Science," mental
suggestion had been practiced, and yet
they say, "If t.ie doctors and practi
tioners had done their full duty Chris
tian Science would never have flour
ished." Will some one oft its critics
stand up and telL us why this "ridicu
lous Christian science nas iiourisnea
to sucn an extent w mie tins asst-i ieuj. ;
"rational.- '"scientific," mind-over-matter."
"work-together-wlth-medi-cine"
remedy adopted by the Emmanuel
Movement attracted no special attention
until the growth and Influence of
Christian Science made it seem impor
tant to "do something" by the way of
competition and as a, means of buttress-
ing the old way?
it has been said that the Christian,
Scientist is inconsistent because he at
tempts to cure a disease alter affirming
that there Is none, and that Christian
Scientists differ from those who are in
terested in the Emmanuel Movement in
that they do not believe in the reality
of disease. In reply It may be said
that the fundamental teaching of Chris,
tian Science is responsible for its con
clusion concerning the nature of dis
ease and sin and that this distinction Is
of vital Importance. Upon it hinges the
whole question of the difference be
tween the teaching and practice of
Christian Science and tlie teaching and
practice of those schools which do not
rely exclusively upon the divine mind.
Christian Science attaches the word
reality only to that which is spiritual
and eternal, not tfi the temporal and
material. It recognizes that sin and dis
ease exist in erring mortal experience,
that experience which Solomon denom
inated "Error of life," and that there
fore they must be grappled with and
overcome, but the success or the over
coming will depend upon ihe means cm
ployed. If sin and disease are indeed
error, not true and not ,real they can
not be overcome by physical means,
since truth aione is the antidote for
error. Here is a point that critics
seem to overlook that the Christian
Scientist's practice is in perfect accord
with his theory, that his exclusive reli
ance upon God in time of sickness is
due to his firm conviction that God is
the only power," that he is the author
of all that exists and that, as sin is
no part of tlie divine economy, it is
simply en or. which can be destroyed
by truth alone. '
Speaking of the Emmanuel Move
ment, Rev. Frank L. Goodspeed, of
Springfield. Mass.. lias said that: "It
is not like Christian Science. You do
not have to insult your Intellectual fac
ulties and blackguard them into be
lieving what Isn't so, as in Christian
Science." We venture the assertion that
"every Blblt student will readily in
dorse the basic siatement of Christian
Science, namely. God is Spirit, and he
will ngree that spirit is not matter
bu Mind. To do this he Is obliged to
deny the testimony of material sense If
he does not "insult" and "blackguard"
it. for materia! sense declares "I do
not believe there is any spirit for I
do not see any spirit." Now. if it is
possible for one to reject the testi
mony of his material senses sufficient
ly to believe that God is Spirit, there
is no reason why he cannot consistently
accept the entire teaching of Chris
tian science, since every proposition of
Christian Science is consistently deduced
from this as a premise. Jesu was not
afraid of insulting his human sense of
things. He declared that "The flesh
(matter) profiteth nothing." "It is the
spirit that quickeneth (giveth life and
existence). The Marter's denial of
sense testimony was as sweeping as
that of Mrs. Eddy. Indeed, Mrs. Eddy
finds warrant for her denial in our
Lord's teachings.
Rev. Artemus J. Haynes. Hartford,
Conn., in a sermon delivered in. that
city said: "I wish to pay a tribute
that I feel Is deserved. Christian Sci
ence took up a great truth that had
fallen into disuse since the days of
the apostolic church. Christian Sci
ence so emphasized that truth over
emphasized it. if you insist as to
compel the church, compel the medical
''c-v'c--.-..:,.....
WILL APPEAR, VHIEN COMPLETED.
fraternity, compel the world to listen.
Let us be fair: we should never have
hward of this Emmanuel clinic had it
not been for the Christian Science.
Church."
One Mind or Minds Many.
There are and can be but two men
tal" methods ot treating the sick, or
Influencing a fellow mortal one is that
which recognizes no other Mind, hence
no other power, but God, good; the
other is that "which is based ttpon the
human, mortal or '"carnal" mind. Now
either there is but one Mind, one God,
or there are minds many, Gods many.
Which proposition is true? rrhe Scrip
tures teach the fact that there is but
one God. God Is Spirit, Life, Truth,
Ixive. Hence the implied teaching that
there is but one Life, one Spirit, one
love, "one good."
An erroneous belief seems to pre
vail to some extent that all mental
methods employed in the treatment of
human ills are fundamentally alike.
Experience will correct this error, for
as a matter of fact God, divine Mind,
is the only real Cause and the only
actual exterminator of evil. Either a
method of healing recognizes this fact,
or else it ooes not. If it does, it will
proceed in comolete confidence of the
power of God lo deal with all cases.
It w-Il! not require a diagnostician to
determine whetner in the premises God
is competent to act. If. on the other
hand, a method of healing does not
admit that God is the only cause, then
the "mind" employed in its mental
healings will be human mind- Its pow-
er is the force of human will and its
cures not f imdamen tal. The supposed
changes which are produced by the ex
ercise of human jvill and which are
regarded by some'as genuine healings
will eventually be discovered to be
only temporary changes of mortal con
sciousness, which are not real correc
tions, but simply substitutes of certain
i erroneous mental conditions for others
equally erroneous
They are the out
come or the condition mentionea
tlie Scriptures, "God is not in all their
thoughts." We affirm that the Psalm
ist was right in his practice as indi
cated by tlie declaration, "His delig"ht
is in the law-of the Lord; and in tits
law- doth lie meditate day and night.
How continuous meditation on the su
premucy of God heals the sick and
overcomes sin may not be apparent to
the casninl observer, but It will surely
become clear to the Christian who puts
the practice to a test. It nay tie well
to note here that thinking of God, as
a matter of course, means and necessi
lates a cousc iousuess of what God is, j
realization of his various characteris
tics and attributes, and his relation
to man and the universe. If such medi
tation is comprehensive It must of ne
cessity take in tiie very nature and
essence of Deity. Among the myriad
ideas which it includes, we might men
tion that It would embrace a conscious
ness that God Is infinite Mind, eternal
Life, immutable Truth, unchanging
Love, that he is the only Cause, the
beginning nnd ihe end, the foundation
of being, tiie ultimate sustenance, the
"author and the. finisher or all things
that 'he is "alf" in all"; that since he
is tlie only Cause, mat which lie ere
ates is the only effect; that the dis
cords, abnormalitli a. evils, which ap
pear to exist, being no part of the
verv good things which God created
have only a mythical existence, they
are but counterfeits of the real and
spiritual creations, and that notwith
standing the fact that they appear to
exist in erring mortal experience and
therefore must be grappled with and
GREAT' BRITAIN'S AMBASSA
DOR TO GERM A V.
4
f A;
WyopA"-1-"'"' ' 1
. Sir Frank Lascelles.
. NEW A'ORK, Dec. 5. (Spe
cial.) Sir Frank Lascelles has
been one of the active figures in
keeping peace between Germany
and Great Britain during the
trouble growing out of the talk
ativeness of the Kaisef. He was
made Ambassador to Germany
from Great Britain in 1895' and
has an intimate knowledge of
the relations of the two coun
tries. Sir Frank is an experi
enced and successful diplomat.
He has served in Bulgaria, Ron
mania, Persia and Russia as well
as Germany.
U:.::
overcome through divine power, they
belong oniv to erring mortal sense-
experience, which Solomon denomi
nated th "error of life."
Christian Healing;.
For about 40 years Christian Science
has found more or less acceptance and
has healed many sick folks through a i
iiance upon spiritual power alone. Sur
viving its doubts and misgivings, Chris
tendom lias eventually concluded and ac
knowledged that Christian Science heals;
hence Mrs." Eddy's prophecy of 15 years
ago seems about to be fulfilled. She said:
"If the lives of Christian Sojentlsts attest
their fidelity to Truth, I predict that in
the twentieth century, every Christian
church in our land, and a few in far-off
lands, will approximate tlie understanding
of Christian Science sufficiently to hea
the sick In His name. (Pulpit and Press,
page 31.) Within the past two years
movements relying more or less upon
mental methods of treating the sick have
been instituted. On this subject the
March number of "Current Literature"
declares: 'The significance of this new
propaganda can hardly be "appreciated
apart from its relation to Christian Sci
ence. It is the product of the time-spirit
that has given birth to Christian Science;
and it lias grown up side by side with
tlie latter faith. It is distinctly an effort
to appropriate, in the interests of historic
Christianity, 'whatever is good' iu the
doctrines promulgated by Mrs. Kddy."
Concerning the Emmanuel Movement in
Boston, it is said: "It rests on the the
ory that religion is the greatest thera-
peutic agent known to man
It is just announced that Dr. James J.
Putnam, of Harvard Medical School, has
given notice that the Emmanuel Move
ment is a "mistake." Vf. McComb and
Dr. Worcester have expressed their "in
terest" in Dr. Putnam's "statement," but
have not publicly stated whether they
will discontinue. Since a number of
prominent neurologists have concluded to
disapprove the movement, we assume
that our brethren of the movement will
drop the term "approved methods" from
their next edition else prefix the word
sometimes. -
Dr. Robert McDonald, of Brooklyn, N.
Y., declares: "There is a demand on the
pulpit that it not only seek to save souls,
but that It also seek to cure the ills of the
body. This demand has been ignored by
the church, and disappointed church peo
ple have turned away to help build up a
cult that claims millioVis of adherents and
has its foundation laid on the fact that
certain cures may be worked through
faith." Thus we note that one avowed purpose
of the Emmanuel Movement, with which
many if not all other movements relating
to the "healing of the sick psychologi
cally" seem to agree, is that, the older
churches shall supply a growing demand
for mental healing, and yet, so far as we
know, nearly all of those prominent in
this movement deplore the fact that many
members of the older churches "have
been attracted to Christian Science be
cause of1 its healings!"
If. as it is claimed, Christian Science
heals by the same power which is em
ployed by other movements dealing with
mental treatment, there is no excuse for
attacking it. Neither is there any reason
why other movements should not hold
their own" by honest competition and
without-feeling called upon to speak dis-paraginglj-
of those who are seeking the
same end by different means. In the spirit
of competition they point with pride to the
fact that they "welcome trie assistance
and co-operation .of the medical frater-
nity. declaring ciirisitan scientists are
uncompromisingly hostile to medicine in
all Its aspects." Tills Is scarcely a fair
statement, pr, while the Christian 9cl
entist. in the practice of absolute Chris
tian Science, relics exclusively upon the
divine power, he recognizes that the
physician lias his particular field of op
eration and that in the present stage of
development he is an important factor in
human affairs. His work, in so far as
it is commendable, is gratefully acknowl
edged by Christian Scientists, neverthe
less in ftis treatment of the sick the
Christian Scientist undauntedly declares
that material and spiritual remedies do
not operate together, that the one acts
against the other and that therefore it is
not only inconsistent but impractical to ad
minister to a patient spiritually and at
the same time employ material means.
To take advantage of these conditions
and seize the opportunity to generate an
unpleasant feeling between Christian Sci
entists and physicians is certainly a ques
tionable procedure. The Christian Scien
tist should be commended, not criticised,
for his consistency with tlie Scriptural
admonition, to trust God only. There is
surely less justification in the act of
holding out the inducement to the public
that one may have new and unusual ben
efits without sacrificing any old beliefs
or methods. It Is reasonable to exDect
and seek new and btter w ays, and means
If we would have new and better results.
The situation justifies an indorsement of
our Saviour's warning that no man can
successfully put "new wine" in "old bot
tles" nor make an old garment as good
as new by using patches of new cloth.
We might add that in the matter or pos
sessing new means of healing sin and
sickness it costs no more to have an en
tirely new and spiritual method than to
seek to improve the old way by a few
spiritual patches. Besides, those who
have had experience first with the mate
rial and then with the spiritual have
proved the spiritual to be better. In the
effort "to minimize the importance of an
undivided faith in UOd, critics should
proceed with extreme caution, especially
when thev unaeriaae to jusmy '.neir po
sition by affirming that the newest meth
od is in strict accora vuiu pi iiuiuve
Christianity while the Christian Science
method is a departure therefrom. It is
with some of the arguments employed to
Justify the modern coalition of mind and
medicine and the tender regard for the
medical practice which the founders of
tlfis union express that we desire to deal
In particular.
It should be understood that Christian
Scientists have no quarrel with any class
of religious believers nor with any thera
peutic school. If they are permitted to
have their choice in the matter, they will
make their way without strife or conten
tion. Rev. Lyman P. Powell, of North
ampton, Mass.. declares that "Any move
ment likely to reduce the doctor's prac
tice pr his income is sure to cause dis
quiet and in some quarters to e"xcite an
tagonism. From the first, therefore, I
have endeavored to win the confidence
of the physician and to emphasize in tlie
public press as well as in private ennver-'
sation the close connection which in tiie
nature of the case exists between the doc
tor and the minister inthe Emmanuel
movement." In this kind of patronage
for an avowed purpose Christian Scien
tists take no part.
We believe that a'l broad-minded, pro
gressive physicians will honor any indi
vidual or class of Individuals who have
the moral courage fo launch out. Into a
way to which honest conviction directs
them, and we venture to say that if thefc
ChriiM-ian does this sincerely, observing
tlie. admonition "Be as wise as serpents
and as harmless as doves,"' he will meet
the approbation of every honest clergy
man and physician. Frankness and sin
cerity are admii-ed, not condemned, by all
J good people.
No one knows netter tnan an experi
enced physician that, notwithstanding
medical science in recent years has ar
rived at a more definite understanding of
physical disorders and symptoms, the
meoical world is still largely at sea in
respect to the real cause of disease, immi
nent doctors openly declare that there is
no known material remedy for certain
quite prevalent diseases, and since it i.s
agreed by all parties concerned that we
should appropriate whatever Is in the in
terest of "historic Christianity," why not
observe the Scriptural injunction "come
now let us reason together," and If pos
sible arrive at a correct conclusion as to
what the founders of historic Christianity
taught and practiced.
Tlie declaration that it Is tlie Intention
of the new movement "to appropriate, in
the Interests of historic Christianity,
whatever is geod in the doctrines pro
mulgated by Mrs. Eddy," is commendable,
but so far as we are able to observe, the
only things that are left for appropriation
after tlie culling is completed to suit the
taste of some of our contemporaries, arc
a few peculiar beliefs wliicji' are not and
never were included in the teaching and
practice of Christian Science! When
Bishop Fallows starts on his mission of
differentiation and rejection, he declares
first that his theory differs from Christian
Science because "it clearly recognizes the
reality of the mind and tlie body and the
inseparable relation existing between
them." This abstract statement Is likely
to mean to those who are not informed
as to what Christian Science gives in
place of that which it repudiates, that
Christian Science denies the reality of
mind and body and that it denies that
there is any relation existing between
them. This is a mistake. Christian
Science affirms that mind and bddy are
not oniv Inseparable, but in an impor
tant sense, identical, and that therefore
the slightest change In the mental condi
tion is manifested in a changed bodily
condition, so that when mortals become
fullv conscious of tlie spiritual truth of
being the body will manifest perfect har
mony, that is. It will be a perfect ex
pression of the perfect Mind, God.
Another point of difference betweer
Christian Science and the Emmanuel
movement as affirmed by representative
of the latter, is this, that the latter at
taches value to "anatomy, physiology, the
practical bearing of psychology In the
treatment of disease." We can under
stand that what Is termed a "psycholog
ical treatment of disease" deals will,
these subjects, but we fail to recognize
what there is in tills particular appropria
tion which may be properly associated
with "historic Christianity," if by "his
toric Christianity" is meant that whlcl
was practiced by Jesus and his apostles.
The most nolnted lesson in physiology
f which the Master taught was the follow
ing. "Taie no thought for the nou .
"Seek ye first tlie kingdom of God and
bit righteousness." His psychology is en
phaticallv set forth in the declaration
cnn,e to do tlie will of my Father." and 1
"1
his praver "Not as I will but as tlioi
wilt " Human will was entirely elimi
nated from his practice. He healed tin.
sinful and sick by relying entirely upon
the divine mind. It is said that Hie new
system differs from Christian Science "in
not being a religious sect," and in this
connection It i.s said. "It Is one of the
dearest wishes of those who hope to see
this movement spread widely that people,
should find in their own particular church
organizations these practicul applications
of Christianity to their daily needs, which
they have sought elsewhere." This is an
honest desire, but In this connection It
should be noted that healing the sick Is
not the sole object of the Christian
Science Church, it is not even lis prime,
object It is the misslorof this church to
proniulK.it? the gospel, to educate mortals .
into an understanding of the science ot
God. Bodily healing ronows as a iu..ul...
consequence of this spiritual regeneration.
Frimi the description given oy ure
cates of the new movement the effort
seems to' be to establish a method ol
healing the sick entirely apart from and
Independent of tlie religion of Christ.
Rev Robert McDonald even d-clares that
the means employed "are not essentially
religious." , .' ,
He declares "It is the human mind
that oures-ns the suggestion emanates
from the strong. rational, conscious
'"ln'his book entitled "Religion and Medi
cine " Dr. Worcester says: "There is no
peculiar piety Involved in the use of suggestion"-
to which we would answer,
there Is.' however, a peculiar piety In
volved in Christian healing, the method
which Jesus nnd the apostles employed,
for they cured the sick by the moral im
provement of their patients. Dr. Worces-
er adds: "We have, seen the consump
e cnnsumi'
rest, fresli
tive nursed back to lif.' by rest, ires,,
air abundant food and kindness-and the
fact remains that consumption can n
i.' .. ; other wav." Sureiy the gen
tleman does not mean to say that it is not ,
possible for God Jo restore the consump
instantly. We realize that in a large
measure mortal- are subject to he slow
process of material laws, but this is be
cause thev Jo not understand anft rely
Sufficiently upon the divine law. because
that in T their seeking they have not yet
found "the kingdom of God and his right
eousness." but are taking too much
thought for matter.
(To Be Continued Next Sunday.)
sue of a Broken Heart.
(! A Thompson In ChicaKO News. '
The big ship sailed with my heart as freight
slim hev for the ocean cold.
I was left behind hy relentless fate.
inK hey. and the ocean rolled.
For my love has Bone with, a chaperons
To do the sights in another zone,
I was left to suffer alone, alone:
Sing hey. for the world is cold.
Tes mv love had gone on a foretcn tour,
i'n" hev. for the rock and shoal;
They "said" It would w ork as a young heart l
cure.
Sine hey. for her papa s roll.
They "said I was naught but an inkstaine;
So wretchedly poor that I had to work
While her father was rich as the lmaltc
Turk.
Sing hey. for I'm in the hole.
The return of my love was premature.
Sing hey. for the ocenn roll.
The voyage had worked her a sudden cure
Sing hey for her foreign goal
She had met on the journey a little ( nun;
Whom she managed to buy for a smai,
amount. ,
So t il drown my woe at sodn fount,
Sing hey for the flowing bowl.