To the Editor of The New York Times:—
In The New York Times' Saturday Review of July 2, there appeared, under the heading, "Books to be Excluded from Free Libraries," a critical reference to Christian Science. Although a regular reader of your worthy paper, the reference escaped me, but my attention was drawn to it through reading in your issue of July 16, the article headed as above, signed "H. E. C." In the spirit of fairness might I ask you to publish the following remarks on the "other side" of the case.
I believe most questions have two sides to them, one "for," the other "against," according to the views of the critic. A perfectly honest person may get as erroneous an idea of a given subject as a person designedly malicious, and probably no subject gives more scope for controversy than the doctrine of Jesus the Christ. This was evidently so from the beginning, or Jesus and His followers would not have suffered such unjust persecution from good people. I have such men in mind as Paul, whose very ardor for the right cause, as he presumed it then to be, at first induced him to persecute Jesus' followers unrelentingly, going even to Damascus for further power to crush them. Later on, the very intensity of his mission work proved how deeply he regretted his former persecution of men and women whom he now found to have been in the right. There is not the least doubt in my mind that later on some of the bitterest foes of true Christian Science (as taught in its text-book, "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures," by the Rev. Mary B. G. Eddy) will be its most ardent advocates, for Jesus' lesson, in regard to the Magdalene, has still its place, viz.: that he who has the most forgiven him will also be the most grateful.
