In spite of Christian Science, some persons remain long unhealed, and some die before the approach of old age. This is a disappointment, and it discloses some imperfection of our scientific action, and a limitation of our power somewhere. This operates as a discouragement to the weak, as a partial bewilderment to some who are comparatively strong in the Truth, as an argument against us in the opinion of the unscientific, and as a ground of triumph to our enemies.
But is that just and rational? Is it any good reason for preferring the old materialistic method? Let their work and that of Christian Science be compared, and let us thence see which can show the best results. We often cure where they have surrendered the case as beyond their skill and power. Where have they cured those who have abandoned us in like despair?
Our cases have so far been cases of the worst and most hopeless kind,—people who have come to Christ only after spending all their means, and all their strength, on the "regular" physician; so that the proportion of cases of death or of lingering illness ought, by parity of reasoning, to be immensely greater among us than among them. That we have some cases of the kind, therefore, is no argument for going back to "the ancient and honorable" method.
