Problems of Immanence: studies critical and constructive

ce in recognising that that incompleteness is inevitable, having regard to our constitutional limitations. "There is," as Newman said, "a certain grave acquiescence in ignorance, a

cannot be explained, it can at any rate be denied. Thus we find a distinguished l

to be evil can be found in the world, either God is responsible for that, or He is {120} dealing with something He did not originate an

ent in respect of both physical and ethical phenomena-not merely to withhold our decision upon this or that particular occurrence, but to admit in general terms that evil is only apparent and not real. But see to what such an admission commits us: if we have no grounds for saying that evil is evil, we can have no grounds either for saying that good is good; if our faculties are incompetent to diagnose the one kind of phenomena accurately, they cann

id of moral discipline with unlimited transcendental speculations." All these cults combine a vague optimism with an extravagant subjectivity; all would have us believe that so far from things being what they are, they are whatever we may think them to be; all with one accord treat evil in its various manifestations as unreal, and maintain, as it has been neatly phrased, that "the process of cure lies in the realisation that there is nothing to be cured." The attraction of such a doctrine for that large number of persons who dislike strenuous effort-either intellectual or {122} moral-is easily accounted for. Evil as a fact is not conducive to the comfort of those who contemplate it-how pleasant to be told t

ate the truth baldly-a person need not be particularly spiritually-minded in order to be drawn towards Christian Science. The natural man would much rather {123} be made well than made good, and a creed which professes to be able to do the former will touch him in his most sensitive part. Certainly, this was one of the difficulties of Christ's public ministry, viz., that the people flocked to Him to be cured rather than to be taught. B

; on the contrary, it says, "This alleged rheumatism or consumption is a mere illusion, a phantasm of the imagination; and the way to be cured is for the 'patient' to discover his mistake. There are no maladies-ther

1

s in the serpent the symbol of malicious animal magnetism, which identifies the Holy Ghost and the New Jerusalem with Christian Science, and the little book brought down from heaven by the mighty angel with Mrs. Eddy's own magnum opus, Science and Health. A

at once to the fundame

enc

is All

Good. Goo

, being all, no

tent Good, deny death

ible permutations are many-the result is always one. God is All: hence, says Mrs. Eddy, "All is God, and there is naught beside Him"; but God is Good, and as He is All, it follows that All is Good; and if all is good, there can be no evil. Again, Mrs. Eddy propounds the following three propositions: God is Mind;

or argument's sake that Mind is the only reality, then the test of reality must be this-that something exists in or for a mind; in so far, {126} then, as evil, pain, and so forth exist, as Christian Science tells us, "only" in some mind-in so far as "disease is a thing of thought" [4]-evil, pain, disease, etc., must pro tanto be real, nay, the most real of realities, for where except in mind could they exist? And even if we c

its manifestations. But error is undoubtedly a form, and even a serious form, of evil; from which it would follow that if evil is not real, error is not possible-and in that case one opinion is as good as its opposite, and black and white are only different {127} descriptions of the same thing. But if that is so, if one thing is as true as another, we shall conclude that, e.g., the rejection of Christian Science i

s. Eddy; "and that," to quote Mr. Podmore again, "is a postulate which can never be contradicted by experience, for failure can always be {128} ascribed-as it is, in fact, ascribed by the Christian Scientist to-day-to want of faith or 'Science' on the part of the sufferer." Nothing could be more entirely simple or unanswerable: if the patient improves or recovers, the credit goes to Christian Science; if he gets worse or dies, the unfortunate result is debited to his lack of faith. The only thing Christian Science fails to answer is, as we have already seen, the preliminary question, viz., what caused the disease-or at any rate the semblance, the malignant hallucination of disease-in the first instance. If God is

1

h it is possible to remain quite unconvinced is the fundamental contention of Christian Science, viz., that there was no disease to be cured. Speaking quite generally, if one is going to be impressed by testimonials there is of course, no patent pill of respectable advertising power which cannot produce such by the wastepaper-basketful; and perfectly sincere and unsolicited testimonials, too. What these prove, however, is neither that the patients have been cured of the particular diseases they may name-and in the diagnosis of which they may very likely be mistaken-nor above all that it is the taking of a particular preparation to which they owe their cures; they prove the enormous power of suggestion and auto-s

practice based upon the observation of such cases; and the Christian Science healers, narrowly educated and of narrow experience, have done just this thing, resting upon the theory that the mental influence of the healer is the effective curative agent. It is easy to see how a development of this theory would lead to the assumption that all kinds of diseases may be curable by mental influence emanating from a healer, this leading to the practice of the so-called 'absent-treatment,' with all its follies and dangers." [6] When it is added that the Christian Science healer is a professional person, and that the cost of "absent-treatment" may come to as much as ten dollars an hour, we need say no more about the "dangers" alluded to.[7] That the quasi-religious formulas of Christian Science may prove extremely effective in bringing about such a c

f the claims of Christian Science so far as physical healing is concerned; but one o

at human beings are not the only sufferers from pain and sickness; animals are subject to diseases, and often to the same diseases as men. We disclaim all intention of treating the subject otherwise than seriously-but if a man's rheumatism is an illusion, what causes the same affection in a dog or a chimpanzee? And if an embrocation may be used with good effects in the latter case, why may it not be used in the former? We need not press these questions; they will serve as they stand to show once more how this whole pretentious philosophy about the unreality, the imaginary nature, of pain breaks down as soon as we subject it to simple tests. So also with the Christian Science attitude towards "drugs," the prescribi

e illusoriness of all evil, moral as well as physical. Christian Science explicitly denies the reality of sin: and that denial follows with inexorable logic from its first principle-that {135} God is All, and All is Good. And here rather than in the material domain lies the danger we have to face; this is the side of Mrs. Eddy's doctrine which, the moment it is attractively presented to, and grasped by, half-educated and unstable minds, will, we fear, exercise a fatal fascination over large numbers. For one person who will seriously persuade himself that there is no matter, or that his sore throat is imaginary, there will be a number to welcome the good tidings that what they had hitherto regarded as sin wears in reali

good-that way not only madness but moral disaster lies. Let us at least understand what this doctrine is, which is being so energetically pressed upon us to-day; and if we see the direction in which that ill-digested pseudo-revelation is likely to lead those who consistently accept it, let us meet this insidious propaganda with equal energy and better arguments. Our first and simplest duty in dealing with the specious doctrine which asserts that evil is "not-being"-a mere illusion which, like the idols spoken of by the Apostle, is "nothing in the world"-is to point out promptly and uncompromisingly that w

el which lightly dismisses this terrible reality, and seeks to hide its hideousness behind a rose-coloured mist of fine words,-such an emasculated gospel is not a message of life, but has the answer of death within itself. That in the past, in a doctrine such as that of man's total depravity, the fact of sin has been over-emphasised, may be readily granted; but in the present all the symptoms indicate that the peril we ha

phrases and contradictions of a mis-called 'Science,' professi

O

ng in being, we reproduce without comment the following report o

re put by the coroner t

rday on Mary Elizabeth

who died of

equest of Mrs. Dixon she gave her Christian Scienc

ollapse on Saturday night, but revived much. When Mrs. Dixon had

s the matter, but is not in the case of a serious

it?-No, I don't. I know God

we all know, why did you have no response?-I su

1

aying for another has perfect faith the patient will not recover?-Nothin

ve called him in when the woman was alive. What is

send for a doctor?-Yes, to set it.

, but she did in food at present, because her underst

got worse was because of lack of

id you not send for a doctor?-I asked

to your lack of understanding?-I

h nine years' experience. Witness had, during the past two years

special qualifications?-No, a practi

ou give a patient a

ive her a hot-w

the line? You don't bel

the other

a judicious contin

beef tea?-Yes,

dical man knows, that beef tea is a stimula

1

r beef tea?-(After a pau

our principles. Would y

in no other help because she belie

octor?-I think the patient

ain is clouded and

said: Did our Saviour use foo

e did not give it in illne

to people who could do without and w

rgery purposes, witness said he would only be cal

the Almighty is a bad surgeon, but a good p

that death was due

with medical attendance

said there was no doubt Mrs.

acute bronchitis, accelerated by gross ne

re. Will you alter it, gentlemen? The jury then altered the verdict to one of

mmar of Ass

al Divine Sc

ommon use that she says, "Mind in matter is pantheism." It has apparently never dawne

Ib

. cit.

on "Psychotherapeutics," in th

s "never taught a Primary class without several and sometimes seventeen free students in it," but adds significantly "The student who pays must, of necessity, do better than he who doe

. cit.

bid.,

1