ALL professed Christians are supposed to be familiar with Paul's words, "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." This naturally presupposes a new outlook upon life, both as regards themselves and others. It is generally recognized that the large following of Christian Science is made up of those who have been healed, reformed, or otherwise benefited by it. It is also recognized that a large majority of this following is made up of those whom other methods had failed to cure, reclaim, or help. This being so, it is conceded that Christian Science heals the hopelessly sick in mind and body, and the otherwise afflicted. The statement that Christian Science heals, therefore, no longer shocks or startles the thoughtful and observing, nor is it contradicted by them.
Christian Science, the knowledge of the Christ, enabled Jesus to prove that "with God all things are possible." This Science is therefore "equal to every emergency," as Mrs. Eddy has said, "offering full salvation from sin, sickness, and death" (Science and Health, p. 406). Notwithstanding this, it is to be frankly admitted that all cases are not healed by the practitioners of this Science, and that probably every practitioner has failed in some instances. The question, "Why was not such a one healed?" or, "Why am I not healed?" is therefore sometimes asked, not only by those who still assail or question Christian Science but also by those who accept its teachings. This leads some, perhaps unduly zealous for the cause, at times to give reasons which reflect discreditably upon patient or practitioner. Some may be led even to comment harshly upon the one or the other; but this is both unwarranted and unchristian, and should never occur.
The questions cited ask a good reason for no result, or for a bad result, from the application of the truth to human needs. There is, of course, nothing easier than for the practitioner who has failed to heal a case to blame the patient, unless, indeed, it is for the patient or the looker-on, who has possibly never healed a case of any kind, to blame the practitioner, and for all to give assumed reasons why the work was not accomplished. In such cases it would be well to close the lips, the practitioner remembering that "earth has no sorrow [affliction] but Love can remove" (Hymnal, p. 298); the patient knowing that Truth cannot fail, and that God is still able to lead him to the one best adapted to help him in the working out of his problem; and the critic realizing that the field to do good is an open one, without hindrance or monopoly, so that if he knows why a case was not healed, there surely would be no objection if he should prove this by healing it.
