WE still hear the remark occasionally made that Christian Science is not scientific. While it is gratifying to observe a larger degree of moderation and consideration manifested than formerly, it may also be well to remember that these utterances are prompted by a spirit that seeks the overthrow of Christian Science. The argument is presented in a milder form, and at times with almost an apologetic tone, admitting perhaps that Christian Science may be scientific in a sense, but not in the general acceptation of the term. Coming in this gentler and more persuasive form, even Christian Scientists, if they are not wary, may find themselves admitting that possibly there is a sense in which this may be true. But such is not the case. Christian Science is scientific in every sense of the word. The terms and words used by the Discoverer of this Science were not used in any abortive sense, they were channels through which ideas were to be conveyed to the people, and must therefore be used as the people would understand them, and with the meaning given them by the best authority.
It is not surprising that the combination of these two words, "Christian" and "Science," should have caused somewhat of a shock in the minds of many, since they have been so generally considered as representing two lines of thought at least antagonistic, if not diametrically opposed to each other. But the objections we now have under consideration are not merely the startled cry of a first shock, but arguments which are supposed to be the result of careful investigation, and on these arguments is based the conclusion that Christian Science is a misnomer. The difficulty may be found in the fact that there is either a misapprehension of Christian Science, or a misunderstanding of science and its methods, or both.
If we were to choose one as representing this class of critics, perhaps we could not do better than to take a sermon on the subject, published in the Universalist Leader of February 1, 1902, to which attention has previously been called in the Christian Science Sentinel. The subject is there presented in a more reasonable and logical, as well as a more courteous manner than is often found. It says, "When we turn to that which is covered by the word 'Science' in Mrs. Eddy's system of faith, we enter a new field of investigation. . . If the scientific world is agreed upon any one thing it is the inductive method; a system of investigation by which the student begins with ascertained facts, and works his way upward to the principles which invite and explain them. Christian Science is the only science claiming the name, which does not employ this method. It is purely deductive, assuming its principle, and explaining its facts so as to make them correspond with it." This much will suffice, as it represents the gist of the whole argument on this point.
