The reason for replying-in detail to objections advanced against the Christian Science movement must be the wish to correct what appear to be certain errors inadvertently admitted into the premises and accepted as the basis of these arguments. Certainly, if the claim of Christian Scientists be true,—that this Science is destined to fulfil the letter, as well as the spirit, of the teaching inculcated by Jesus of Nazareth,—it must be conceded to be the most "stupendous business" that can engage our attention. It is contended by some that the attitude of Christian Scientists in insisting on the finality of Mrs. Eddy's teaching is objectionable; that it is not necessary, in order to "find a point of contact with the teaching, to acknowledge the authority of an individual and the doctrines of that individual." Now such a statement would convey an entirely wrong impression; Mrs. Eddy did not originate, nor does she claim to have originated, one iota of truth. She, however, gave articulate expression to the truth which she had discerned, the truth which Jesus said would make men free, but which had been practically a dead letter since the third Christian century, until its life-giving power was discovered by her. This discovery she put to the test of experience, by making it the basis of actual demonstration; and any one who in humility and childlike receptiveness will proceed step by step in acquiring an understanding of the rudiments of the Science which she has brought to light, may learn to prove in a similar manner the propositions it offers.
Who would undertake to maintain that the disciples of Euclid were putting themselves under bondage to "the doctrines and authority of an individual," in acknowledging his leadership in the field of geometrical science? Would any honest and rational student of mathematics feel justified in rejecting the text-book which bears the name of that master mathematician on the ground that "an attitude of mind which will acknowledge the finality" of the teachings set forth therein is prerequisite to a comprehension and application of them? The dogmatic "stubbornness" with which the mathematician adheres to the postulates of his science is not based on mere assent to the decrees of those individuals who in the progressive unfoldment of Science were first to formulate its propositions. On the contrary, the axiomatic basis of the rules which govern mathematical demonstration is disclosed to all students in common in the course of their application of them.
The authority which Christian Scientists acknowledge rests on the unimpeachable sovereignty of demonstrable truth, physically, morally, and spiritually exemplified, of which the text-book, "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures" by Mrs. Eddy, contains a correct and complete statement. It is evident that the claim that Christian Science is an absolute and exact system, must either be true or false. How, then, can one expect rightly to judge of its merits except by endeavoring, intelligently and understandingly to work out problems in the manner it indicates? If the systematic study of the higher branches of mathematics is profitable, shall that of the Science of Mind, of which Christ Jesus was such a marvelous exponent, be deemed less so? "Prove all things." says Paul.
