IN these days of a world-wide sense of sorrow, when all men everywhere are being forced to think of something higher and better than the mortal concept of life with which many have hitherto been satisfied, there must be an ever increasing appreciation of and gratitude for the Christian Science church. Those who are striving to establish in their consciousness the true idea of church, as Mrs. Eddy has defined it (Science and Health, p. 583),—"The structure of Truth and Love; whatever rests upon and proceeds from divine Principle,"—are enabled by that understanding to seek and find in times of greatest stress the protection and safety of this ever present "structure of Truth and Love," which no storm can sweep away. Mrs. Eddy says further: "The Church is that institution, which affords proof of its utility." Can anyone find to-day so great a power in the affairs of men that is giving "proof of its utility" as is the Christian Science church? And one of the things we are all most grateful for is the fact that this church is bringing about the elevation of the race by awakening the individual understanding, as Mrs. Eddy tells us, and that it is therefore necessary for each one of us to be aroused and to put into operation his own understanding, so that the inevitable result of this awakening will be the healing of the sick and the destruction of error everywhere.
Webster defines church as "a building set apart for public Christian worship;" also "the collective body of Christians; all who are in spiritual union with Christ, acknowledging him as their head." How much greater is the spirituality of the second of these definitions. "A building set apart for public Christian worship" means little. It may be cold, comfortless, unlighted, even closed ofttimes, until it is animated, occupied, and cheered by the coming of the "collective body of Christians." It is of course easily discernible that the church could not possibly be contained by any material structure; it is in the "spiritual union" with God and His Christ, acknowledged as head of all. Since the world has been willing to accept in theory the definition of church as given by Webster, why has it been so unwilling to accept it in practice? Why has "the collective body of Christians ... in spiritual union with Christ, acknowledging him as their head" refused to live in accord with this outward acknowledgment? Why have Christians denied the Christ-power over sickness and death, which was so convincingly demonstrated in the life of Christ Jesus, and believed only in the power of the Christ to forgive sin?
It is because the Christian Science religion, based on the Bible, has accepted "the whole Christ" (Science and Health, p. 142) that it is to-day so helpful to poor humanity. Men are under pitiless fire on the battlefield; loved ones are left behind, anxious, faced with want and misery; there are, besides, the sick and the poor,— and what does it mean to these that the Christ takes away sin if there is no aid for them in their present distress. To such as these Christian Science comes with the blessed promise of healing for all their diseases, as was demonstrated by Christ Jesus in feeding the hungry, healing the sick, cleansing the lepers, and giving sight to the blind. Jesus said very plainly that the works he did his followers also would be able to do.
