THE writer is in receipt of a letter from a man who has been an active member of an orthodox church for half a century, a man whose voice has been heard in earnest exhortation and prayer, and whose Christian character is above reproach. The claims of Christian Science, as to the lifegiving virtue in Christianity, have been brought home to him through the healing of a member of his family after the efforts of materia medica and his own prayers had failed to bring even temporary relief. Although admitting the good works of Christian Science and the lack of his own church in this respect, he writes in substance that he does not know how to rely upon God for his own physical health and healing. Could there be a more pathetic admission of the failure of modern Christian ideals to measure up to the standard established by Jesus, when after fifty years of prayer, devout Bible study, and consecrated work along the lines approved by the Church, a Christian does not know how to trust God to the extent of his health?
The above is not an exceptional case but fairly represents the average Christian's attitude towards spiritual healing. It is the understanding and not the desire that is lacking, and how is it that this knowledge has not been gained? What has the Church been teaching and doing all these centuries that it cannot yet take the first step in practical Christianity; viz., the healing of the sick? In addition to its "Confession of Faith," must not the Church have a confession of faithfulness as well? How is it that Jesus' injunctions to "have faith in God," and to "heal the sick," meet with such little response from his professed followers? What has so divided their confidence in God that they are unable to believe that He will heal their diseases, even as the Bible declares? Does it mean that with them evil so holds the balance of power in this world that they cannot believe God to be capable of saving them from its grasp?
Popular religious belief finds it quite possible, and even easy, to believe that God will save mortals from a great yawning hell when they die, while it stands pitifully helpless before the sufferings that afflict them here. Is it necessary that a man should die in order that he may understand and rely upon God's omnipotence? Will God be more gracious, more merciful, more loving or kind on the other side of death than He is on this, that Christians are willing to commit the safety of their souls to Him throughout eternity, while they shrink from leaving the health of their bodies in His keeping during their short sojourn on earth?
Those who disapprove of Christian Science healing should tell us how it is that Christians can go on for their lifetime declaring their belief in God and in Christ Jesus' redemptive work, and when disease attacks them run in terror to some drug, or medical doctor, instead of to God, to save them? What has such an one to whom we have referred learned of the real meaning and purpose of Christianity, or of the privileges of Christ-discipleship, when he stands before some condition of physical disease and says, "I do not know how to trust in God for this"? Or how is a Christian Scientist blameworthy or unchristian who stands in the same place and rests his cause so confidently in God that he has no need or desire for any other remedy or means? Which of these two follows more closely the teaching and example of Jesus? If the Son of man came to find faith on the earth, which of these conditions represented would appeal most to him?
It should be a matter of deep consideration and heart-searching why Christians generally are so reluctant to take God's promises seriously; and why they refuse the opportunity that Christian Science affords, to learn how to heal the sick as well as the sinful in accordance with our Master's commands. A Christian who cannot rely upon God to the same extent that he relies upon a doctor, cannot too soon find out the reason why. If he does not take the Scriptures as his guide in such a course, why not? How can he deceive himself that he is doing God's will, if he is not faithfully taking up his cross and following in the footsteps of the Master? Jesus showed us how the Father's will is done on earth by healing disease and sin and overcoming death. He taught his disciples that their lives must be a demonstration of their faith, but he did not say very much about death except that those who kept his sayings should not taste of it. It was the demonstration of spiritual life which he was most concerned about, not the weak yielding to death as having any virtue or goodness, or as taking man one whit nearer to his heavenly Father. In the light of Jesus' teaching and work, it is evident that the more a man understands of God the further he will be removed from death, and that there is no other way by which eternal life may be gained.
The needs of the human race press for the return to primitive Christianity. To teach mortals that the sufferings of earth are unescapable through Christianity, is to take away from it the feature which its Founder deemed so important and necessary. The Church to-day cannot afford to leave out of its work what he considered so essential to his own success. Mere ritualistic religion, the observance of church ordinances, or professions of Christian belief, if not backed up by intelligent, reliant faith, will never rebuke the demons of disease, nor say with joy to the Christ, "Even the devils are subject unto us through thy name." Christ Jesus said, "Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?"
That God, divine Love, is the Father of all, is the sweet burden of Scripture, and it enters into the creed of the Christian church. The child who loves his father will turn to him for help in trouble, and not to some stranger who may not know his needs nor have any sympathy for him. We would deem it a strange thing for a child to have more confidence in such an one than in his own father. Likewise why should a Christian forsake his heavenly Father in time of trouble, and turn for help and comfort to some non-intelligent drug, to that which has no knowledge of his needs nor sympathy for his misery? Is it possible that after all he does not believe that God is the loving, compassionate Father of man, ever-present and omnipotent, that he does not give Him as much confidence and love as he does to an earthly parent?
While Christian Scientists do not consider themselves as personally better than others, they do find that through Christian Science they have more confidence in God than they had before. And while they do not feel like condemning those who in sickness do the best they know, they feel it but just to say that in their own experience they have found that by looking to God alone for health they have fared immeasurably better than when they sought it by material ways and means. It is because of what they know, not what they believe, that Christian Scientists advance the claims of Christian Science and urge their impartial investigation. Although Christian Science came to them as a new religion, they have since found it to be the sweet, old, simple Christianity of Jesus Christ, with nothing left out of it and with nothing read into it by mortals' material belief. They can say with David, that God hath done great things for them, whereof they are glad.
