THE name by which our religion is known, Christian Science, has been the subject of some unfavorable and unjust criticism on the part of people of other religious denominations. This unfavorable view of the name comes from various sources and is the result of various causes. Some object to it because they associate it with material science, which they believe to be opposed to religion. From this they naturally reach the erroneous conclusion that Christian Scientists are not Christians. Others seem to look upon it as sacrilegious to couple the names of Christianity and science together in any form. Apparently, without any definite idea of the error or even the impropriety of it, they just think it should not be done. Still others, who seem to know what science really means as applied to Christianity as well as to other things of which knowledge may be had, look upon the taking of this name as a piece of arrogant assumption, because it seems to amount to a claim that Christian Scientists have a better knowledge of Christianity than people of other religious denominations, especially their own. And yet others object to the name, simply because it represents a new religious movement. Their own church and religion are quite good enough for them, they think, and therefore in their estimation something new must be something wrong.
In stating her reasons for the name given to her discovery. Mrs. Eddy says that she sought "to find the Science of Mind that should take the things of God and show them to the creature, and reveal the great curative Principle,—Deity" (Retrospection and Introspection, p. 24). To this she adds that after the light of Truth dawned upon the Scriptures, she "apprehended for the first time, in their spiritual meaning, Jesus' teaching and demonstration, and the Principle and rule of spiritual Science and metaphysical healing,—in a word, Christian Science. I named it Christian, because it is compassionate, helpful, and spiritual."
To one who realizes what the two words taken together really mean, and what they are intended to convey to the minds of men, the criticism to which we have referred seems very absurd and unreasonable. No one who is himself a Christian, it is assumed, would seriously object to the use of the word Christian in designating or identifying a church, provided it should in fact sincerely profess and teach the Christian religion. Indeed, one of the principal religious denominations of the present day has adopted and is known by that name. It is not known that any other religious denominations, or members of their churches, have ever objected to its use. Hence it is fair to say that the objections made do not attach to the use of the word Christian as the name of a religious denomination or church which accepts the Bible as the source of its teaching.
