ftf *5 > s *s£. / LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. Capjrigfyl f 0. Shelf -- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE EXPOSED. BY J. H. BOYET, D. D. lit, 1889, by J. H. BOYET. 1889. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE EXPOSED. BY / J. H. BOYET, D. D. Copyrighted by J. H. BOY^T. BAPTIST NEWS PRINTING HOUSE, DALLAS. 1889. , ofc ONG PYRIGHT JUN 101889,] [MOXOMIHffVJfc f W^OMOO 10 U«n«ri «hx !o9SS J. II. BOYBT, I). I). -< INTRODUCTION. A PEW things are necessary to be said by way of introduction. In the early part of August L888, I visited Eureka Springs Tor my health. On the way there I met a man from Springfield, Missouri, who was a Christian Scientist. and I believe connected with a school of that kind. He paid no attention to the gentlemen on the train, but sought every opportunity to talk to the ladies, and spent his time in pressing the claims of his theory of Christian healing upon them. This fact provoked some unfavorable com- ment. I knew nothing of his theory, and, although the man had a bad countenance, I put him down simply as a crank. I ob- tained from him a circular from their school and a printed copy of their rules to patients, which impressed me rather an- favorbly; though not being able to con- 2 Introduction. nect it in any way with their theory, of which I knew nothing, the impression did not amount to much. During my stay at the Springs there was a debate between one of the Scientists, a Mr. WaudeU, and a Mr. Shelton, pastor of the Christian Church at Little Rock, and I attended several times. Mr. Waudell seemed so meek and Christ-like, and Mr. Shelton ap- peared so vindictive, that my sympathy naturally went to the Scientist. Mr. Shel- ton frequently denounced Christian Science as Free-loveism and Mormonism, but as Mr. Waudell said nothing that I could so interpret, I regarded it as a lit- tle piece of persecution, and so expressed my convictions, notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Shelton repeatedly said that he had studied the theory. They were only discussing the question as to whether the blessings of the Gospel extended to the healing of the body, and I did not know what the theory was, or that they had any, except a supposed scriptural theory. Introduction* During the follow in- wintei j >rs. < Kbon and Boj ntoii \ isited Efonej ( Jrove for the purpose oi introducing Christian Science. in the town, and \)\. Boynton visited my house. 1 found linn quite agreeable and talked with him at length in regard to the Eureka debate and the power of God to heal the sick. Mv convictions in regard to it were not crystalized and I was will- ing to hear him kindly, though he advan- ced no special theory. They began prac- ticing in the town, and reputable people claimed to have been cured. This pro- voked a great deal of dispute, and I ex- pressed the belief that there was some- thing in it. One day I met a couple of respectable ladies on the street, and in conversation they solicited me to join the class and take lessons. The best excuse I had at my command was that I could not afford to pay the fee of twenty -five dollar.-. They insisted that I would be able to un- derstand it better than sonic others, per- 4 Introduction. Imps, and asked if I would take the les- sons provided they would see the fee ar- ranged. I agreed to do, so provided it did not conflict with my pastoral duties. 1 was afterwards notiiied by a member of my church that the matter was arranged, and I took the full course of lectures, studying every principal involved as well as I could and taking notes as I went along. I took special pains to ask ques- tions whenever I had the least fear that I or the class might not understand a prop- osition, or the principle involved. When- ever a proposition was laid down which I thought to be in conflict with established laws, or detrimental to the public mind, I would not only call attention to it in the class, but would speak of it to the pupils separately, in order that my conclusions might be corrected, if wrong. I do not pretend that I have reached the same ethical conclusions that have been reached by other members of the class, but I do claim that I have given Introduction, the subject impartial study, and questions touching my most serious objections have been put to the teacher and members of the class and they have never been ans- wered satisfactorily, nor has mj under- standing of i lie theory, tlieologj and creed ever been questioned in any private con- versation. My sermons on the subject were preached to large audiences, and the privilege of asking any question was granted with the promise of a frank and public answer, and none have been asked. Those who have heard the matter talk- ed on the streets have doubtless heard enough said in one way or another to con- vince them that I have given a fair expos- ure of Christian Science as taught by Dr. Gibon. The treatment I received by the teach- er and the class was of the kindest nature and for them personally I cherish the kind- est personal feelings. Some of them I have known for years, only to admire their kindness and purity of life. (> Introduction. As to the theory they have adopted and are innocently using in the belief that it has power to produce phenomena, 1 have do respect whatever, and in exposing it. I do so believing it to be the most ingeni- ously devised and the most subtile and destructive form of infidelity and anarchy with which I have ever met. I say here, as I said at the close of the lectures, that I came out a better Chris- tian than I went in — not that the theory did me any good directly, but because or- thordox Christianity was put to the severe- est test, and after wading through all the differentiated metaphysics incident to such a test, I came out more firmly fixed, if possible, upon the solid rock of Christ's vicarious work. The errors are not diffi- cult to see, but the fact that pupils are us- ually first inamored with the idea of phe- nomena seemingly produced by the system in the recovery of some one, together with the gradual development of the the- ory, most persons come out believers, or Introduction, * too much compromised to rise above it. An experience meeting is held after everj lesson, for the purpose of confirming the faith of the pupils and to prevent open opposition afterwards by those who are liable to react; and those who arc no1 guarded in the wording of their express ions will come out very much hampered. whether they believe the miserable non- sense or not. This little book is there- fore intended as a warning against the class room, as well as against the destruc- tiveness of the theory taught. In giving this exposure to the public I will say that I have never been obligated not to do so, and have performed the task in the fear of God and for the good of society. THE THEOi CHBIST] \ OUt with absolute negation of all evil as an entit The Scientist proposes to show that the DO evil, no sin. no devil, no disease, no death, that it is all a false claim of the carnal mind. — that the carnal mind is a lie. and that a lie is nothing claiming/to be \ something. Tins primary proposition with the sever al secondary ones, he proposes to prj by the aid of Scripture, reason and demon- stration. The Seience professes to be metapfr ical strictly, looking at every question from the standpoint of mind or spirit, and excluding everythin cms to be. It proposes no cure for di for there is no disease, and it only prop* make the patiem conscious of that fa It proposes no remedy for sin. for there is I (I The Theory. no sin. It only proposes to mala 4 us con- scious of the fact that sin is impossible. It does not propose to overcome the dev- il, for there is no devil to overcome. It only proposes to make us conscious that all is good. Another explanatory 'statement of the position is that we do not deny the ap- pearance of of evil, but that we are de- ceived by the outer senses — that the out- er senses belong to the carnal mind — that the carnal mind is a lie, and a lie is noth- ing, claiming to be something. It tirst assumes an hypothesis and then reasons from that hypothesis. The tirst hypothesis is that God is omni- present, and then claims that if God is om- nipresent, nothing can exist outside of Him. As one hypothesis must be examined at a time I will examine this one with the conclusion, befores tating another. And to do so we must tirst learn what is meant by omnipresence. This we shall learn, so Thi lin ory, \ ) far as the Science is concerned, from the conclusion, "Nothing can exisl outside of Him." As nothing can exist outsid< God, and as whatever is inside of God pertains to Him, there is nothing but God, Omnipresence, then, according to the Science, is God to the exclusion of evei thin-else. We now have the hypothee stated and defined. Is it true/ Omni- presence means, presence in every place at the same time. If omnipresence means "presence" at every place or any place we will readily see that we must define the word "presence." Presence means. "TLe state or condition of being present; being, or situation within sight or call, at hand. in the same apartment or division of space, or the like— opposed to absence." It will now be readily seen that presence, or om- nipresence involves the idea of two or more: since where there is only one there IS no presence. Because to occupy the same division of space is to occupy it with another. 12 Theory. It will now be seen that the only way to extricate the hypothesis from the difficul- ty is to grant that omnipresence is not really meant, but that God is everywhere at the sam* time. It is fair to say that we believe this to be what is meant, and we shall now proceed to examine its con- sistency. If a special revelation be left out of the count there can be but one way of determining the truth of the proposi- tion, and that is by universal conscious- ness. Let us see. Is a consciousness of God's existence universal among men? We may say that we believe all men to be conscious of God's existence, but that be- lief is not a demonstration. We cannot be conscious for another, and whatever we may say about the consciousness of an- other, which contradicts the statement of that person, is less than belief, for it is not based upon any kind of evidence, it is only an opinion. And it forever remains a fact that there are atheists who claim not to be conscious that there is a God. Thus we io1 know i Iia1 a consciousne > of God's existence or pi e among men. Therefore the bypotln fails with the failure of universal con sciousness. But we will even go furthei and examine one other claim, which mighl be made, though ridiculous in the realm of scientific demonstration. It ma\ barelj claimed that God exists where there are none to be conscious of His existence, or presence 1 . But how can science demon- strate the proposition I If there is a place where there are no human beings to be conscious, and the existence of God is only demonstrable in human consciousness then there is a place where God's existence cannot be demonstrated, and thus the hy- pothesis fails again. But we will now go one step below the ridiculous in scientific demonstration, and grant that one human being may claim to be conscious that God exists everywhere. In this case the con- sciousness of one individual must extend to every place. Consciousness is "the 1 1 knowledge of sensations and mental ■ erations, or of what passes in ones own mind; the act of the mind which mat known an internal object.** Thus we see that consciousness is internal and not ex- ternal of one's self, so the conclusion is in- evitable that if the consciousness of one person demonstrates God's existence at every place, it also demonstrates the in- ternal existence and consciousness of one person at every place. Xow we hold that the term internal is relative and that if any one person has an internal the same person has an external — hence if the in- ternal is everywhere the external is out- ide of everywhere, This also brings as to another ridiculous conclusion which is, if omnipresence means existence every- where we have in one human being some- thing more than omnipresence since that one person is externally outside of every- where. We boldly claim that these conclusions though perfectly logical are ridiculous in Tin Tin < the extreme and must m |j crush the scientific idea of God's omnipresence. Thus for we have ignored the Bible en- tirely, but as Christian Science graciously admits the Bible to confirm whatever maj be already proven or demonstrated, we will now see it' the Bible confirms the scientific idea of omnipresence. But let I what that idea is, (i. e.) that God is SO essentially and substantially present everywhere that nothing can exist outside of Him. In Gen. 1:2 we learn that the .Spirit of (rod moved upon the face oi the waters. This would be impossible. scientifically, if the waters were not out- side of God. To move upon is to come in contact witli by moving towards: and it the spirit of God came in contact with tin waters there was a time when the contact did not exist. Again in Gen. 1:27, we learn that God created man. We will firsl notice tin word create. It means -To bring into be- ing; to form out of nothing; to cau.se to [6 ih( Theory* exists Now did God create something outside or inside of Himself! Scientifical- ly speaking whatever is inside of a being pertains to that being, and if there was a time when God created something inside of Him, there was a time when that thing- did not exist in him. If this is true, then there has at some time been a change in God's internal being. You may call it a thought of God or what you will, but it amounts to an internal change, and who will say that God is not the "Unchange- able One?" If God has had no internal change he has created something outside of Himself, and if outside of Him, something exists outside of Him. But what was it He cre- ated? It was man. Xot a thought: but something that could think. The distinc- tion between God and man is not, as be- tween the thinker and the thought, but as between two thinking powers, one the greater and the other the less. Xow let us see what that man could do. In Gen. Tin 1 in ■ 1 j iii:8-10 we learn that the man hid himself from the presence of the Lord. This could not be true if man was scientifically speaking inside of God, for in thai event they would have been occupying the same apartment or division in space. The writer should not be understood to tench that God does not in some way manifest Bis presence or power to be present everywhere. But that He is pres- ent everywhere to the exclusion of every- thing but Him is contradicted by reason and scripture and by this contradiction of the first hypothesis we deny the theory of Christian Science. The essential omnipresence of (rod should never be denied, but to affirm it upon the scientific principle that no two tilings can occupy the same space at the same time is utter nonsense. The second hypothesis with which Christian Science proceeds is that God is omnipotent. The conclusion from this hypo- thesis is that nothing can exist without Him. 18 Theory. To admit or deny the hypothesis without first knowing what the Scientist means by omnipotence would amount to nothing. If the question is asked. Do you believe tha r God is omnipotent! Most people would answer: yes. But the critical in- vestigator would ask, what do you mean by omnipotent? This can only be deter- mined by the nature of the conclusion. It will be observed that the hypothesis involves not only the idea of existence, but of power also. Therefore it will be seen that the conclusion means that noth- ing can exist without God's power to give it existence, and to maintain that ex- istence. Thus we see that omnipitence, according to Christian Science means, the only power that can give or maintain ex- istence. Is this true? The discussion of this question is very much narrowed by a denial of the real existence of anything but mind; that whatever else may seem to exist, does not exist in truth. We are not bound to make this concession, but that we maj go to the bottom w e can do bo and still approach the question \\ itfa h bold and steady front. We will chum rust thai if there is noth- ing but mind, there is aothing to influence mind except mind, because nothing is nothing, and can have no power or influ- ence whatever. Now we ask; what is il thai causes the apprehension of evil! Do you say it is nothing? Nothing can not produce something, and an apprehension is something produced in the mind. Do you say the apprehension is a deception/ Then what produced the deception? Call it what you will: it is something produced by a cause adequate to the efteet. Will you claim that the cause is a part of, and resident in, the mind/ Has God made a mind tor the purpose of having it always frightened with -hosts and hobgoblins that never existed/ The conclusion is too absurd to be entertained for a moment — and yet that is just what He has done, or else there is another powei 20 The Theory. adequate as a cause to the effect. But it is claimed that God made man in His image, and then man made his image, body or shadow in which there only seems to be evil. Here we have the w T hole the- ory of seeming evil in a nutshell. God is perfect and has made a perfect image of Himself but when that perfect image is copied it looks like the devil. It is useless to pursue this thought any further. God is either directly or indirect- ly a perpetual deception, or else there is another independent existence. And now as the Bible is to be admitted by way of confirmation, and as a deception is a lie, we need only to remark that the Bible de- clares the devil to be a liar and the father of lies. The merest tyro in metaphysics will now see the hypothesis is not only overthrown and the existence of something which God did not make, established, but, also, that, something is evil. Omnipotence means power to do all The Thi <>>■ ii. 2 1 things, but not necessarily the power thai has done all things that have been done. The third hypothesis is thai God ii ab- solute goodness. And the conclusion is; that, no evil can come out of Him. The error of this hypothesis is two-fold. It reduces (iod to a mere quality ot being or principle and tends to the conclusion that every principle is good. We discuss it here, not so much for the purpose of proving that evil does exist, but because the error referred to was introduced at this point. We gladly admit that God is absolutely good, but when an attempt is made to reduce Him to mere quality or principle, and when that principle is de- clared to be impersonal, we will not be content to pass it without notice. We first notice the fact that the propo- sition is a contradiction in term:. By no law of language can a personal pronoun be used to designate a mere quality or principle. How would it do to use the pronoun "he" or "him" in speaking 22 The Theory. oi the principles of mathematics? The teacher of Christian Science himself would not do such a thing. Or how would it do to say "it" when speaking of God? The strongest believer in Christian Science, I am glad to say, would not do such a thing. And yet, it is just what they say when speaking of the principle ol mathematics. In the next place a principle has no per- ception. A being or person can perceive the principle of mathematics, but the prin- ciple of mathematics, cannot perceive any- thing. A principle may be called a law of mind but it is not mind. It may be called a line along which we think correctly, but is not a thought nor a thinker. A principle without a person to think it out is cold and dead. It has no life, no vi- tality, and no existence except as it pro- ceeds from mind. Goodness is only the quality of being good, and to say that God is absolute goodness, is only to say that He is the quali- ty of some person or thing which is good. Goodness may be said to exist in < ;.»< i and next to I rim; hence we can gel no information oul of anything. There is no reason whj ire should accept the Bible as a whole ex( that "we liave been taught to d<> >•>." it will thus be seen thai the Bible is accep- ted in Christian Science or rejected ac- cording to the caprices of the human mind, and that too, with a theory to sus- tain. The teacher said again, "Paul was the image of God. Mr. was the imagi of (rod. If what Paul wrote was inferior to Paul it was therefore inferior to Mr. ." Thus you see he not only puts the Bible below Paul, but places it below himself, and at a discount with one of Ins pupils. I have often heard of per- sons who were so smart that they could not be taught anything; but never did 1. till I met with Christian Science, find a man that was fool enough to acknowle it. Put here these, Christian {! Scientist lovers of the Bible (t) boldly claim that 28 The Creed. the very best thing that can be said for the word of God is that it only confirms what they already know. To show that he did not accept the Bible as a whole he referred to Eev. xxii:18-19 and 2 Cor. xiii:8 as positive contradictions, and to say that the whole course of lectures was a con- stant attack upon orthordox Christianity is not putting it too strongly. He said Or- thodox Christians believe that Christ's work was vicarious, but we accept His life as an example. At this point a pupil asked him what he thought about baptism, and he said he cared nothing about it. They teach that Adam did not fall, be- cause he would have no place to fall to. He could not fall outside of God. That the fall was in the belief that life was in matter, and that Adam's mistake was when he made his own body. A very small mistake to be sure, if the body was noth- ing after it was made. They teach that self-denial is denying that there is any power in the body. They also deny the The Creed. divinity of Christ and reject prayer alto- gether. 1 have thus given an outline ol what they call their theology without Stopping to discuss it. I now ;isk the reader to decide for himself as to the appropriateness of the name "Christian Science/ 9 and as to what re- spect is due a practically secret organiza- tion, claiming to be the only true religion in the world, and at the same time teach- ing that there is no personal God nor dev- il, no Divine Savior, no sin, no evil, do disease, no death, no hell and no law hip love, no fall, no atonement, no prayer and no Bible worthy of the name. Before God, 1 believe it is anti-Christ, and if they can heal at all as a result of their theory, I be- lieve it is the devil transforming himself into an angel of light for the purpose of spiritual ruin. I do believe they can in a measure re- lieve the sick but in no way do I believe the^r theory accounts for it, only thai de- SO The Cn signing men have been prompted by the devil to formulate a destructive theory and tack it on to a well recognized force in nature for the purpose of doing more barm than good. I believe that while dis- ease tends to death nature tends to re- covery, and that in many cases the sick would recover if let alone without medi- cine. I believe also that whatever will cause the patient to ignore and forget his trouble will aid nature in restoring health. To satisfy myself that their theory could not account for the phenomena which they claim I have submitted to treatment with no results. I can sometimes drive pain from my head, and have relieved others, but others can have no effect on me what- ever, for the simple reason that I am more highly charged with magnetism than they are. I am willing to give equal justice to all. but after a thorough course of lectures and a careful study of the subject I am not only convinced that much of the prac b hid bug bul that the theorj > geniously devised oul of old exploded the- ories, by designing and wicked men satisfy their avarice and their lasts. And in most cases it is accepted by innocent parties who do not understand it nor b< i its results. But let it go on until their eyes are opened one by one. and many who went into it innocently and have enamored with phenomena produced by physical magnetism and mental superiori- ty will he too proud to back nut of it squarely and will either drift along with the tide or practically losing their id. ty in society will be lost to its charms and sink out of sight. Animal magnetism when properly used is a power for good in many ways, but when possessed in a high degree by wick- ed and designing men it is the most de- structive and damning element of human nature. It will often cause innocent wo- men to admire the company of men wl charactei is as 1 ;k as Belf, and un- 32 The Creed. consciously overleap the bounds of all propriety, bringing upon themselves the unjust criticism of the public. It has caused jelousy to arise where no wrong has been meant. It has compromised the standing in society of innocent females, and then forced them on into the whirl- pool of ruin. It has laid desolate a thous- and homes and left a blot upon the good name of ten thousand children who by it are made worse than orphans. It can produce faith in the poorest means for accomplishing good. It can transform the homliest face into an object of beauty and inspire the attention of the most intelligent persons, to listen to and believe the most miserable foolishness in the world. It places the blushing innocence of wo- manhood, the integrity of true manhood and the rottenness of the gambler and the libertine in the ball room upon a common level and sends the lovers of pleasure home too proud to confess that they have been influenced by it. 1 I trail engage the attention of orthordos < Ihristians, th doabl upon the divine \ eracitj . still the lips of prayer, deny the divinity and \ ica- rioufi work of Jesus Christ, swear that there is no devil, no evil, no sin, no hell and proclaim that there is no law but I All this it has done, and more, and then to i50ver its deformity from the gaze of hon- est men outside of the ring it i tself by the name of Science, sanctifies its pow- er by the inefable name of < Ihrist, and pro claims itself the only true religion in the world. THE CREED. You ask: "Has Christian Science a creed F Y^es sir, it has a creed, and they call it by that name. It is negative, dog- matic in the extreme, and tends to corrup- tion, debauchery and shame. It contains three articles, as follows : # 1st. "There is no life but God." 2nd. "There is no substance but spirit." 3rd. "There is no law but love." The animus of this creed is easily seen when viewed in the light of other proposi- tions. If taken together with the nega- tion of all evil, sin and hell, as taught by Christian Scientist, it will be seen that the object of the theory is not the healing of disease; but the breaking down of all re- straint, of all law and all human responsi- bility. If there is no life but God, and if all that is, proceeds from life; then God alone Tin C is responsible for all thai is. It man Is oniv a thought of God, as thej teach, and has no distinct life of his own: then what- ever man is, God is, and whatever man docs it is God who docs it, and He alone is responsible for what is done. [f there is no substance but spirit; then the body is nothing; and it' the body is nothing, the actions ofthe body are noth- ing, and if the actions of the body are nothing they cannot sustain a relation to something*, and of course where there is no relation there is no law, and where there is no law there is no penalty and consequently no restraint. If there is no law 7 but love, and if we are only constrained, and no; restrained, by love; then, whatever we are constrain- ed to do is right and lawful. This leaves every desire and every m t of our lives free from condemnation of law, and makes all lives equally respectable and good. But at this point we stop to ask, it* there is no life but God, wherein all the 36 Tin Creed. universe is is there any room for a creed? A creed is something believed: and since Clod knows all things, He cannot believe anything and hence if this article be cor- rect the very idea of a creed, of which it is a part, is preposterous. The second article is the foundation rock upon which the whole theory or super- structure of Christian Science is attempted to be built, and I cannot see why it is not first in the creed, unless, there be a pre- meditated attempt to catch the student unawares in its developement. Upon this article hangs all their law and their prophets. By denying the existence of all substance, but spirit, they do not mean that spirit is the support of all that is, but that matter does not exist and that the human body is nothing. In showing the falacy of the position I will call attention to a principle recogniz- ed by them and one unto which they of- ten liken the Almighty, viz; the principle of mathematics. This principle is applied I iii computing time, distance and velocity. But it' there is uo mat ter i here is uo1 hing from which to calculate time, nothing from which to measure distance and nothing from which or i>\ which to consider the question of velocity. A fern years n.uo we had a total eclipse ofthe sun. and Fort Worth, Texas, wasin the exact line of totallity. The govern- ment and our best colleges had the vcr\ best men and means there for the purpose of taking observations. Here this princi- ple of mathematics was applied and the calculations made years before, involving time, distance and velocity and under most perfect means of observation the phenomenon began and ended to a second. Here the calculation involved the relation of three separate and distinct planets over which neither faith nor imagination could have anything to do whatever, showing to any sane person that thej reallj and substantially exist. These things are known to 1 1n world of mankind and \ 38 The Creed. man of intelligence conies to Honey Grove, Texas, from the North, to teach innocent souls to believe that there is no such tiling as matter. And for what purpose? For the purpose of indoctrinating them in the idea that there are no relations and no law but love. During the lectures I asked the teacher to explain the effect observed in the mix- ture of incompatible drugs, over which faith had no control. He twisted in his chair and said, we had not come to that yet; and he never did come to it. Every- body knows that incompatibles such as acids and alkalies neutralize each other, and that when incompatibles are taken< into the human system the same work of destruction goes on there, showing that the human body is as real and substantial as any mineral drug. The law of gravity forcing a ball, thrown into the air, rapidly to the earth proves that the ball is substantial and the same effect upon the human body proves that Tin Creed. 39 it is as real as the ball, or t lie eart b w II h which it is Wrought in contact. The sensitive plate of the photograpbej will not receive any impression from the imagination, hut an exposure upon a real subject will take the features and the com- plexion. Again the effects oi mental anguish on the physical constitution proves the body to be real. Take the case of Jesus Christ whom Christian Scientists accept as the ideal man, and when the Roman spear en- tered the pericardial sack there came forth water with the hlood showing that mental anguish had produced physical disturb- ance and a consequent unnatural accumu- lation of fluid around the heart. Now let us examine one passage in the Bible by way of continuation. Paul says. "The flesh lusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh and these arc contrary, the one to the other, so that we can not do the things that we would.' Here the apostles recognize the existence 40 The Cr< otboth flesh and spirit by the conflict go- ing on between them. Have we not all experienced the same warfare going on in our being? Every one with one spaik of honesty left must confess that he has, and yet where there is only one party, or na- ture, there can be no conflict. It is non- sense to say it is a delusion. There can be no delusion where there is no power to delude, and when you say that our expe- rience in this respect is a delusion, you admit that there is not only some part of us to be deluded, but that there is some- thing to produce the delusion. If this warfare is a delusion, and on that ground you say that the liesh does not exist; then on the same ground, you may say that the spirit does not exist. Precisely upon the ground of this strug- gle within us for something better, is the argument made for the existence of a bet- ter nature — and upon the same ground must the reality of a worse nature be rec- ognized, for the one can not be consider- I in ( , I I ed except from the standpoint of the oth- er, The idea of Christian Scientists, that everything is to be viewed from a spiritu- al standpoint, is utter nonsense. As well may you talk about dewing a house f rom the standpoint of the house as to talk of viewing the body from the standpoint of the body, orthe spirit from the standpoint of the spirit. The body is the house, the spirit is the occupant, and so long as they are both in existence each one must be viewed from the standpoint of the other. Eight here the teacher gets fuddled, and tries to befuddle bis class by saying that man's real self is only a thought of God. And now we have i1 gone to sv^ { \. Man is one of God's thoughts. What man periences is a delusion. Therefore what God experiences in one of Bis thoughts is a delusion. Xo sir, the delusion is in Christian Science, and the object of delusion will be clearly seen before we reach the end. 42 The Creed. If the body is nothing, then, the actions of the body or nothing, and as there is no such thing as physical action in fact, there are no physical relations, and if there are no relations there is no law; hence, the third article in this remarkable creed. "There is no law but love. ?? Here Christian Science raises the red flag of anarchy, and with a defiance more dreadful than the bombs of Chicago, flings to the winds the authority and re- straints of all law human and divine. Is our civilization ready for such a revolu- tion? I say revolution, because I was 1 plainly told that the adoption of Christian Science meant a complete revolution of all the theories I had ever held and taught. And in writing this little book I am only preparing to bring upon myself the curses of every free-lover from Maine to Cali- fornia. Dr. Gibbon said that Christian Science would make a man love another man's wife as well as he would his own. One of 'Hi, I }.; two tilings, and only two, was tn< Either he would love the other man's wife more than her husband would tolerate or else he would love his own wife less than she would tolerate, and in cither case it would be the destruction ol the man relation. I will now give the definition of law: 1st. A rule of order or conduct estab- lished by authority; an edict of a ruler or a government; a fixed regulation; an ex- pressed command; a decree; an order. 2nd. The appointed rules of a commu- nity or state, for the control of its inhabi- tants, whether unwritten, as the common law of England, or enacted by formal stat- ute, as against or according to law. 4th. (Morality.) The will of God as the supreme moral ruler, concerning the char- acter and conduct of all responsible be- ings; the rule of action as obligatory on the conscience or mora! nature; the rules of external conduct which arise from the relations of men to each other in 44 The Creed. and the mutual rights which are founded on these relations. I do not suppose that an open and speedy attack upon the Hays of our coun- try is contemplated, but it is a delusion of the devil: an excuse by which poor delud- ed souls may cheat themselves into the belief that they may do what they will without transgression of law and therefore without sin. We may perhaps indulge the hope that only a few of those, at least in the South, who believe in the healing power of Chris- tian Science adopt this article of the creed, but just so sure as the belief be- comes general just that sure will red hot anarchy run riot in this country Then good by to the purity and sanctity of home and the marriage relation, and good bye to all that is worth living for. It is unnecessary to argue the unreason- ableness of this dogmatical and dangerous creed. We may only wonder that in this country of enlightened civilization there is Tin On IB a practically secrel organization with <>\ei thirty- tour thousand teachers, privatelj promulgating this crystalized and formu- lated monster which threatens the vcn overthrow of every home and the ruin of every mother, wife and daughter in the land. And an organizatton too, claiming to be the only true religion in the world, and proposing to organize Sunday Schools for the fortification and upbuilding of their principles: which, though destructive of every principle of holiness, they vainly at- tempt to sanctify by the blessed name of Christ. On being questioned in regard to pro- fane language, the teacher said it could not be wrong, and being questioned fur- ther in regard to the moral quality of ac- tions, lie made light of the idea thai they had any moral qualities, as the actions themselves were nothing. These illustrations of his teachings are to show what is meant by that article in their creed which says there is no law but 4f animal magnetism, whether posessed by them- selves or others, especially in our towns and crowded citi< Before bidding adieu to the reader, I want to record my belief in the power of God to heal disease. I believe that God is the only creative and restorative power in the universe Satan's power is destruc- tive) and I believe thai as the Holy Spirit proceeds from God. for the restoration of soul, so the vital principle of w^ry drug proceeds from God for the restora- tion of the body. Beyond this James teaches that God will heal in answer to prayer. He does not heal every one for whom prayer is offered, neither does He heal every one who takes medicine, any more than He saves every one with whom 60 The Phenona na. the Holy Spirit labors. But the truth of Christian Science must be established by the recovery of every case; because they hold that there is no disease in fact, and that the truth will make the patient con- scious that all is good, and that sickness is impossible. If there is no disease and truth is infallible, as ;hey teach, it is out of the question that they should lose a single case, or fail in a single case to make the patient feel entirely well. But there have been numbers of failures, and there is a noble, good woman in the asylum at Terrell, Texas, now, upon whom they ut- terly failed, not only to cure, but to pre- vent insanity. But enough has been said. The whole theory is false and destructive: and all the practice based upon it is a fraud. I would as soon take the money out of a man's pocket as to mesmerize and delude it out of his hands. But when it comes to the money Dr. Gibon is as materialistic as any other physician, and actually made J In /'in noun int. <*» I more clean cash than any two doctoi 3 ihc same length of time. There are many, ni) doubt, in it w.i » are led i ood peo- ple, but with the founders and lead avarice, and perhaps something worst at the bottom. The following positive contradictions are line given to show the utter tomfool- ery of Christian Science: 1. a) God is the only life. (b) God principle, like the principle of mathe- matics. 2. a) Man is the image of God. (b) Man is a thought. 3. (a) Man lias no body. (b) Adam made bis own body. 4. (a) There is no evil, (b) Evil thoughts paint themselves on the body. 5. (aj Adam never fell, (b) The fall was in thinking that life was in matter. 6. a) There is no disease. (b) We can cure all diseases. 7. (a) The carnal mind is nothing and nothing cannot produce something, b The carnal mind produces the belief that we are sick. Many others could be given but th< are sufficient, and comment is unnecessary . THE NAME, Peibaps something should be said about the name, "Christian Science." Some say it is a misnomer. Strictly speaking it is, for there is in it neither science nor Chris- tianity. The name, however, serves its purpose. This is the age when seven wo- men take hold of the skirts of one man and say: "Only let us be called by thy name to take away our reproach." Its founders and many of its adherants care nothing for Christianity nor for science. I will venture the statement that among the thirty four thousand teachers there is not a single scientist of any note. And as to the theory, there is not a thing peculiar to it that has not in one form or auother been exploded and laughed out of coun- tenance time and again. The theory that matter does not exist has been dead and buried so long that its grave-stone me. had tumbled almost into forgetful 1 To recognize it as "Christian" is bias* phemy. for it is not only out of harmony with the Christian religion bul is the worst enemy to it thai threatens the church to- day. Its adherents, claiming to be christians, deny the doctrine of Christ's atonement. and ignore any remedial system, on the ground that the human body is nothing and that the soul is incorruptible — that man was, is and always will be the per- fect image of God. It ignores faith alto- gether and thus puts at naught the very around of the Christian's hope. Hope it- self with them is essentially thrown to the winds, since they claim to believe nothing they do not know and understand. Touching this point they are agnostics and not Christians. Christian Science is worse than a mere misnomer. It is named for a purpose and is all the more dangerous for its name. The worst of toes are not those who meet 64 The Name. as on the open field with weapons of war and marching to the sound of martial music, but tlose who come with honied words of simulated love. Christian Science is like Joab asking A masa, "Art thou in health my brother!" But when he would appear to take him by the beard to kiss him, smote him there within the fifth rib. and shed out his bow- els upon the ground. It is like Judas, that miserable villian, who earned no sword, but approached his Master with deceitful kisses, and by that sacred token betrayed Him to his foes. The writings of Tom Paine or the rav- ings of Ingersoll are the merest innocence compared with this formulated monster which names itself "Christian" for the purpose of insinuating itself into the churches to destroy their bulwarks of faith and hope which raving infidels have nev- er scaled nor battered down. It speaks like a gentleman and scholar and uses language of courtesy and courtship in its Thi Name. B5 reference to Christianity, bul when it uses the very technology of Christianity it is with that infernal ingenuity thai emp- ties it of its very life blood and lays i1 low .it the feet of scoffing infidelity. There is one ihin^ I honor Dr. Gibons for, and that is he loft bis church because he thought Christian Science inconsistent with or- thordox Christianity, and I here say thai no man with proper self respect who be- lieves in the theory and creed of Chris- tian Science, I mean the Eddy School, will remain in any orthordox church. ' f' 3L » * «►♦• lite™ .-*•' ^% Hfly Op 7? °o/v, 'G %; 660 Ss 8? 4