My attention has been called to an editorial bearing the headlines, "A Discovery that Man is Self-Creative," which appeared in the Statesman of a week ago last Sunday. Inasmuch as there is a doubt expressed in this article as to whether the periodical called Freedom, from which the quotation under discussion was taken, is an organ of Christian Science, it may not be amiss to make a few statements concerning a subject which is of so much interest to many, and is causing so much general discussion. Mrs. Helen Wilmans, the writer of the article which was quoted from Freedom, is not a Christian Scientist, and her meagre understanding of this subject renders her incapable of voicing the sentiments of true Christian Scientists. There is only one official organ of Christian Science, and that is the Christian Science Journal, published at Boston, Mass. Any article appearing in this Journal may be relied upon as voicing the sentiments of true Christian Science, as neither love nor money can procure the insertion of an article or advertisement in this magazine unless the same be in strict conformity with Christian Science. An article like that which appeared in Freedom, stating that man was "self-creative," could never be written by one who understood Christian Science, nor could it find entrance into the columns of the official journal. It is pleasing to note that you do not ascribe such unchristian sentiments to Christian Scientists. As its name implies, Christian Science is founded on the teachings of Christ, and neither He nor His disciples ever conveyed the idea that man was self-creative. Such conceptions—or rather misconceptions—arise either from ignorance or unwarranted interpolation of the Word. If the editor of Freedom claims that the "secret," as she is pleased to call it, of Christian healing has not been discovered, she confesses her ignorance of what has been done in this line in the last twenty-five years. In almost every town and village in the land there are those who have been raised from hopeless invalidism to renewed health. Let those speak who have sat by the bedside of some loved one through the silent watches of the night, when the death angel was hovering o'er, and hear them tell how, through the silent ministrations of Divine Mind the sufferer felt the "unspeakable peace" which preceded a complete recovery. A half million hearts speaking prayerful thanks tell whether or not the immanent presence is with us to-day in the healing of the sick as in the days of long ago, when Christ proclaimed the eternal laws of life from the mountain side, and the shores alongside Galilee. These facts in Christian Science are no longer in the disputed domain of experiment. They are acknowledged by those whose testimony has weight, and I myself have in my possession several hundred written statements from those to whom the thought of recovery was but a shattered hope, in which they set forth such remarkable instances of healing as would dumfound the sceptic and cast consternation among those who scoff at the healing power of Christianity as demonstrated in Christian Science.
In the closing lines of your editorial you make the following statement:—
"Until Christian Scientists have demonstrated that the possessor of this healing power is given that power by a certain Christian training, and not by hypnotism, it will be difficult for them to induce the popular mind to draw the distinction between hypnotism and its effects, and Christian Science and its healing effects."
