The Sentinel of June 16 contains the interesting testimony of Mrs. Rowney, accompanied by a physician's letter substantiating her statements. This letter refers to a report of the case in the April number of the Journal of the British Homoeopathic Society, a copy of which is before us. From this we learn that Dr. Stonham gave a detailed statement of Mrs. Rowney's case at a meeting of the above-mentioned society, on Jan. 4, 1906; the report of the case and its discussion by members who were present covering about twenty-three pages of this medical journal. Dr. Stonham says that Mrs. R. "underwent both surgical and medical treatment without deriving any appreciable benefit," and he adds that "her case was a remarkable one both from the nature of its symptoms and from the manner in which they were ultimately cured." He goes on to say that her illness began ten years ago, and that during much of the time she was under medical treatment. The report shows that the case was carefully studied from a medical standpoint, and there is every evidence of a truly humanitarian spirit upon the part of the doctor, and to this the patient gladly testifies. The doctor, however, candidly admitted to his confreres that materia medica had failed to heal her. and that Christian Science did, and he says further, that Christian Scientists "would not have made such headway as they have recently done in America and in this country unless they had something to show for it."
The report of this case and its discussion by the members of the medical society reveals the fact that while the utmost care is taken in the diagnosis of such cases, the observations and deductions are confined to matter, with no reference to mental or spiritual possibilities. It is maintained that exact science must deal entirely with material phenomena, to be exact, and that the spiritual element is unreliable or unknowable. An amusing instance of this appears when one of the members wished to credit Mrs. Rowney's remarkable cure to a single dose of a certain drug, given six months before, though she had grown steadily worse until she had treatment in Christian Science. The vital point at issue, however, is the fundamental question, What is Truth? The position taken by these representatives of materia medica is that disease is real, hence true, and consequently, that a declaration to a patient of the reality of health would be untrue; though it was admitted by some of these doctors that such a declaration might heal the patient, when the truth (?)—the statement of disease—failed to do so, though backed up by the very best medical methods. Jesus said, "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
It is not difficult for Christian Scientists to see the position in which medical men find themselves when they attempt to account for spiritual healing by material means. Nearly all who come to Christian Science find themselves more or less confused until they understand and acknowledge the spiritually scientific standard of Truth, which is so clearly defined in "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures" by Mrs. Eddy. From the study of this book they learn what has so long been hidden "from the wise and the prudent;" namely, that disease has no reality in the strictly scientific sense, because it neither possesses nor expresses entity, inasmuch as it is not a manifestation of Life or intelligence. Disease is, therefore, but a purely negative condition of human consciousness, and when it is removed from the human mind and body, nothing has been taken from the sum-total of the individual's existence. This statement may be further explained if we use light as an illustration. Now light symbolizes Life, Principle, while darkness is merely the absence or suppositional absence of light. Darkness has no centre from which to radiate. It would be impossible to bring darkness into a lighted room, but light replaces darkness instantaneously, and when it does, the latter does not require any other space in which to manifest itself. Christian Science teaches that disease has no principle any more than has darkness, and this statement is susceptible of the same proof as the proposition respecting darkness and light.
