IT would hardly be possible to state more concisely and clearly the reason for the existence of Christian Science than has Mrs. Eddy on page 107 of Science and Health: "Through Christian Science, religion and medicine are inspired with a diviner nature and essence; fresh pinions are given to faith and understanding, and thoughts acquaint themselves intelligently with God." The significance of this statement came very vividly to thought in reading an article published in a New York paper, under the caption, "The Limits of Medical Skill," in which some very interesting statements are made respecting the medical treatment of disease. It cites the case of a French doctor, who was recently sued because of his failure to cure a patient whom he had treated for a supposedly incurable disease. In his defense the physician gives prominence to "chance" as an element to be counted on, and then says, "What would you? Man is mortal. The doctor is not God." The article goes on to say, "Is it for our good that physicians should thus declare their relative helplessness? It is a difficult question; especially nowadays, when we are coming more and more to believe that a great part of the blessing which the doctor dispenses comes not from his prescriptions, but from the courage he lends us to make head against disease."
It was contended in the case cited that the word "cure" has a "different signification, according as the disease we combat is acute or chronic;" indeed it was stated that "cure in its complete sense can only be used of acute maladies, that in case of chronic disease the physician can only retard the approach of the fatal end." This theory, which is based upon the mistaken assumption that disease has entity, — that it may become a part of one, inseparable from his existence, has been proved untenable in the case of many sufferers whose diseases had been pronounced incurable by medical authorities, but who were healed in Christian Science. In a number of instances these patients were afterwards examined by their former physicians, or by others equally reliable, and pronounced entirely free from the maladies from which they had suffered.
The admission that "the doctor is not God" would not be disputed, and is certainly deserving of the earnest consideration of all thoughtful people, as it raises the question to what extent the Divine power is taken into account in the ordinary treatment of disease, by people at large, and especially by doctors and ministers. An orthodox clergyman once censured very severely a doctor who in a crisis asked the clergyman to pray for the recovery of his [the minister's] wife. He took the position that the doctor did not know his own business; that if his remedies cured disease they did so according to law, and that prayer had nothing to do with that law. He was at least consistent on this point, for he held firmly to his belief in material law and frankly admitted his ignorance of any spiritual law which would heal the sick.
