OCR Text |
Show ABSURD CLAIMS OF CHRISTIAN SCIENCE Is Neither Christian Nor Scientific, But Abounds in Denials of the Teachings of Christ. (Rev. Walter M. Drum, S. J., in Catholic World.) Mrs. Eddy's new religion wears the attractive mask of Christianity and science. That . mask should be torn off, for this so-called Christian Science Sci-ence is neither Christian nor scientific. In this claim we follow the lead of all critics who have not striven' to read into Mrs. Eddy's creed whatsover things Christ taught or did, but have scanned her work in the. light of the fundamental principles of Christianity and science. The statement that Christian Chris-tian Science is not scientific can be made good by many arguments; but, for the present, wc shall confine con-fine ourselves almost entirely, to the question: "Is Christian Science Christian f Airs. Eddy and her followers assert that their creed is Christian ; in the first place, because Christian Chris-tian Science works such cures as Christ wrought. We roplv that Christian Scientists do not work such cures as Christ wrought; and. even if they did, such cures would not demonstrate the Christianity ot Christian Science. First, Christian Scientists do not work such cures as were wrought by Christ. What cures these would be was foretold by Isaias, xxxv. 5: "Iheu shall the eyes of the blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as a hart, and the tongue of the dumb shall be free." Christ referred to this prophecy, proph-ecy, when summing up his works for the disciples of John. "Go and relate to Johif what you have heard and seen; the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are made clean, the deaf hear, the dead rise again" (Luke vii, 22). The Xew Testament narrative narra-tive is full of such cures. Christ raised from the dead the sou of the widow of Xaim, the daughter of .lairus, and Lazarus. He healed the blind, the deaf and dumb, paralytics, lepers, invalids and demoniac's He conquered all forms of disease. "All they that had any sick with divers diseases," brought them to him. But he, laying hands on every one of them, healed them" (Luke iv, 40). "Jesus went about all the cities and towns . . . healing every disease, and every infirmity" (Matt. ix. 35). Christian Science has not cured ' any one of blindness, deafness, dumbness, paralysis, leprosy -not one who had been bedridden for thirty-eight years, not one who was either possessed or obsessed, by the devil. Mrs. Eddy was offered two thousand dollars if she would give sight to one born blind. She knew her scientific formula would tug and toil in vain against such disease, and so she refused to apply that panacea. Airs. Eddy advises her pupils to leave surgerv to the surgeon. Christ reset the amputated ear of Malchus. Christian Scientists fail not only to work the cures that Christ wrought, but they fail also to heal in Christ's y ay of healing. Christ healed by a word or by the laying on of hands and in an iru stant, without any ostentation. His cures were wrought in public; "neither was any of these things done in a corner" (Acts xxvi, 2). Christ used his power before the very eyes of his enemies, men of learning.' who could not deny the wondrous deeds (John xi. 47). Cure's are otherwise in Christian Science. The Christian Scientist does not profess to cure instantaneously; she "demonstrates over" the unreal disease again and again, and maybe after twenty unreal treatments, for which real dollars are charged, the unreal hysteria yields to that incantation incanta-tion which goes by the name of the Scientific Statement. State-ment. We say incantation, because of the meaningless mean-ingless jargon that makes up the Scientific Statement. State-ment. Whether we consider, then, the infirmity cured or the way of curing, the euros of Christian Science Sci-ence are not such as Christ wrought. But even if there were no difference between one or two of the cures of Christ and those of Christian Science, it would not bo at all certain that Christian Science is Christian. . First of all, M.rs. Eddy denies that her cures are miraculous they are, she maintains, according to the ordinary course of nature. To be sure, Mrs. Eddy's concept of nature's ordinary course is not ours; her concept is far from the -ordinary, 'and consists in the realization . that sickness is only "an image in mortal mind," and-that "mortal mind is unreality." If her cures are wrought by purely natural causes, why should Mrs. Eddy appeal to them? Such cures may prove the truth of certain natural laws; but they prove nothing at all of Christian Chris-tian dogma. Let us suppose that Msr. Eddy administers admin-isters an overdose of strychnine the result cannot be doubted. Would it not be highly ridiculous if one were to appeal to the action of strychnine as a proof of his Christianity? Yet such an anneal is not one whit more ridiculous than that which Mrs. Eddy makes to the action of what she considers purely natural causes, in order to demonstrate the Christianity of her new cult. . Secondly, even though the cures of Christian -Science were not wrought by purely natural causes, an appeal to sue-h cures would not prove the Christianity Chris-tianity of Mrs. Eddy's teaching. For Mrs. Eddy's teaching is contrary to the teaching of Christ; and no number of cures, if wrought in confirmation of a teaching that is. contrary to the teachinsr of Christ, can ever n'rove that teaching to be' Christian: Chris-tian: such cures have been wrought bv an agency inimical to "Christ. God cannot confirm the truth of Christ's doctrine b.v one cure, and itsr falsehood false-hood by another. We say that the teaching of Mrs. Eddy is contrary con-trary to the teaching of Christ. Her points of departure de-parture are many; we shall not try to catalogue them all a few will prove our .statemen. Mrs. Fjly r.e.rcts the teachings of Christ on the immutability immu-tability r the deposit of faith, the inspiration of the Old Testament, the reality of sin and all truths connected therewith, and, lastly, the Christian virtue. vir-tue. Such rejection stands out clearly in tho pages of Mrs. Eddy's writings. We say that Mrs. Eddy's teaching is first and above all a rejection ot Christ's teaching on th.v immutability of tho deposit of faith. Christ taught that after the eleath of the apostles there would bo . neither increase nor decrease in what we call the material object, of faith, the sum of revealed truths would be eonstunf, no new articles would b: addd, nor old articles lost. All the truth- of faith were made known by Christ to the apostles: -All thimrs whatsoever I have heard from my lather, I have made known to you" (John xv, l-"). These truth-, were more fully unfolded later on by the IIolv Spirit. "When he. the Spirit of truth, i come, he will teach you all truth" (John xvi. Nil. The apostles apos-tles understood that the truths of fa ill. were tin changeable. St. dude beseeches his Hock tn "contend "con-tend earnestly for the fnitli once d liven d to the saints" (Judo St. Pa.ul i- ever nn.st solicitous that his convert cha litre naught of the faith. He writes to Timothy: "Tho-u ha-t fully known my doctrine . . . continue in those thimrs which thou hast learned (II Tim. iii. H. It). Keep the good thing committed to thy trust" (II Tim. i. It). He begs the Romans: "Mark them who make dissensions dis-sensions and offense, contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them" (Bom. xvi, ' 17). Ho bids the Galatians to curse either himself or an angel from heaven or any one else who preaches to them a gospel besides that which they have received (Gal. i. ). There can be no doubt-that doubt-that Christ gave the deposit of faith complete and unchangeable. I (To be continued.) t |