Not long ago, I wrote about the ineffectiveness that is magic, i.e., Christian Science. In today’s Kennebec Journal I had a letter on the subject published.
I am writing in response to the Dec. 4 letter from Seth Johnson. He makes the odious claim that Christian Science is somehow a responsible alternative to actual medical practices. He is wrong.
Christian Science belongs alongside astrology, creationism, acupuncture and all the other pseudoscience practices, notions and ideologies that have pervaded the minds of the gullible.
Johnson may very well care dearly for his children; I believe his word.
But it is nevertheless frightening that he would place their well-being in superstition and mythology.
Until he realizes that actual medical practitioners are the ones qualified to care for his children — not prayer or really, really strong belief — the health of his children remains as at risk as the child who has no health insurance.
Christian Science does not work.
It is a belief that undermines legitimate medicine.
It’s unfortunate the editor chose to give this piece the title “‘Christian Science does not work’ in medicine”. It actually does not work in anything.
Filed under: News | Tagged: Christian Science, Kennebec Journal, letter to the editor, me |
For the Sake of Science 
In reply to Mr. Hawkins comments about Christian Science not working: Suggesting that ‘medical science’ has all the answers to the health and well being of mankind is obviously absurd. After being diagnosed with an ‘incurable’, debilitating illness in my twenties Mary Baker Eddy’s book Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures was put into my hands with the simple instruction, “read this”. Nothing was mentioned about a Church or about healing, but I read the book, was completely healed of the ‘incurable’ illness and have gone on to live a happy and productive 30+ years, so far. From my perspective, Western medicine gave me no hope and Christian Science healed me. I have also seen members of my family and others suffer horribly under medical care and then die. Until allopathic medicine can claim a 100% cure rate and comes with the financial reach of everyone, my inclination is to let everyone seek healing wherever they can find it.
As for caring for children, my son, raised in Christian Science, had far fewer problems with his health while growing up than many families relying on medical care that I knew.
This looks like another case of extracting anecdotal evidence and applying it as evidence for something else. In this case, you have two instances of Christian Science “working”. The first is yourself and the second is your son. Without knowing the specifics of your illness, it is impossible to comment on it much beyond citing the fact that even though some illnesses and diseases almost always result in death, a small percentage will not pan out the same way. As way of example*, see Stephen Hawking.
The case with your son is an awful way to reach a conclusion. The fact that he happens to be healthy despite your belief in anti-science medicine is not somehow proof Christian Science works.
*Note the difference between this as an example and your citations of anecdotes. One represents a statistic, the other does not.
It’s an old argument. It does not invalidate my life experience or that of countless thousands of others over the past century.
If by “old” you mean well-substantiated and sensical, then yes, noting that anecdotal evidence, by definition, is not evidence of any sort of statistical fact is an old argument.
Your life experience remains the same, but I am pointing out that you’re attempting to declare something as valid through invalid means. That doesn’t fly – and it’s precisely the reason actual science rejects Christian Science.
It is a joy and privilege to speak up for the healing effectiveness of Christian Science. The proofs I have personally experienced for many years of God’s healing power as made available through Mary Baker Eddy’s wonderful discovery of Christ Jesus’ healing method would take hours to recount. Why would anyone stay with this religion if it didn’t “work”, as you put it? Common sense tells you we are receiving benefits from Christian Science, or we wouldn’t still be its grateful followers. I can never thank God enough that I have it to turn to in every conceivable circumstance.
You are focused on healing of physical afflictions which is what most people think of when they hear the words “Christian Science”. But what I’m most indebted to it for is being drawn closer to God, understanding Him better, knowing more about divine laws that my Master knew. Healing is actually the lesser part of my religion, but it has proved to be a stepping-stone for thousands to a higher understanding of our loving, heavenly Father who “healeth all thy diseases”. (Psalms l03)
Oh, hope I may add a P.S. which is a big thank-you to Arline Young above for sharing her wonderful experience with the Christian Science textbook, “Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures” by Mary Baker Eddy. My own mother came into Christian Science from the Methodist church because someone recommended this book. By just reading it and pondering the truths in it, she was dramatically healed of a condition of years-standing which kind doctors could not cure. Can you just imagine her joy at being free?!
Sharon, I am concerned with the so-called healing aspect of your religion with this post. It holds nothing compared with real science and medicine. That is where healing actually takes place. I’ll grant a placebo effect for Christian Science, but that’s far from being a very worthwhile for believing – especially if it entails also believing in a particular god myth.
As for Arline Young, she didn’t share much of anything. She made a vague claim and then cited an anecdote as evidence. It seems that with both of you we have a case of seeing correlation and drawing causation.