The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-01-11
DR.. SHUTTERS REPLY
He Taxes Abbot Edes Smith With
Unfair Assumptions
N CHRISTIAN SCIENCE DEFENDED
His Discussion of Christian Science
Not IL DenunciatiOn,
He Says.

Rev. DR.. NJ d. Shutter, pastor of the
Church Of the Redeemer, says that Abbot
Edes Smith proceeded upon false aSsump-
lions in his recent article. christian
Science Defended" which was written as
answer to his CDR. Shutters) recent
lecture on the influence of mind over
disease in which mention was made Of
Christian Science. DR.. Shutter says he
will enter into no controversy, but, I'M
der the title Mr.. Abbot Edes Smith Cor
rected," offers the following:
l do not wish to enter into a controversy
with Mr.. Abbot Edes Smith, any one
& else, and shall not. simply wish to correct
Misrepresentation. Mr.. Smith, or any one,
is at liberty to discuss any OF my opinions
to criticize any of my positions; but he
has no right to make a false assumption and
proceed upon that basis
In his article, u few days ago, entitled,
christian Science Defended" he gives the
impression that l have been writing series
OF articles upon Christian Science; that |
have attacked it, and that l have treated it
unjustly that Christian Scientists feel
aggrieved and need defense against as
saiant. Each of these assumptions is dis
tincty and inexcusably wrong; and my only
feeling Is that OF establishment that any fair
minded man could have made them.
Mr.. Smith seems overanxious to appear per-
secuted and is determined to make me-of
all men-from whom he has never received
anything but courtesy, the instrument Of his
torture. He is determined that I, who In
vited him to plead his own cause in my pull
pit and who treated him, when ne came. with
every fraternal expression Of good Will in
my poor power, shall be regarded by this
community as prosecutor. His reasons for
this fail to fathom, and shall not do him
the injustice Of hazarding q guess.
The facts these: l have been deliver
ing series Of Sunday evening lectures upon
the various mental phenomena which are at
tracing attention at this time, and these lee
lures have been reproduced In one of the
morning papers. Naturally, among other re-
lated topics, l spoke of the influence Of the
mind in disease. In that lecture l said Of the
various theories included: Il do not men
ton them for any but the most serious purpose
to lind out the truth they contain and to
measure their practical results" There were
no hostile remarks, there dishonest
treatment OF any system or its representa-
tives. Incidentally, Mr.. Smiths system was
included in the discussion, and that l might
make mistake, l quoted several sentences
from the text book. Some of these quota
tons indOrSe. Mr.. Smith does not mention
that. From the philosophy of the universe
and of disease, in that text book, however,
dissent, and l said so; but in no denunciatory
terms. At the same time that l registered
my dissent from that theory and several
others-for it was not considered alone--l
commended many OF the practical results
Mr.. Smith does not mention this fact Those
who want TO know what did say are, there
fore, referred to the printed articles. In
stead OF taking this course, Mr.. Smith cries
out in effect: christian Science has been
attacked; must defend ourselves; this
man must be put down" And then he adds
in so many words; christian Science is the
religion Of the Bible, as taught and explained
by Jesus Christ A criticism of Christian
Science is, therefore, ipso facto, a criticism
OF the Bible and of our Savior" This CLAIM
would be more impressive were 1t not made
in the same terms, by several hundred other
sects Of Chrstendom. But in no case has
the claim prevented investigation and dis
cussion; and these always involve criticism
which means nothing more than critical ex.
animation. Judge Ewing, the other evening
pleaded for exactly such critical examination
Judge Ewing is wiser than Mr.. Smith; fol
he knows that to discuss is not to denounce
to Investigate is not to prosecute; to criticize
is not to assal; to reject even, after exami
nation, is no disrespect to those who are con
WINGED and no impeachment of their judg
ment. We do not all see things alike ani
cannot. 1t is with some feeling Of humilia
ton that | find myself obliged to point ou
these elementary distinctions to a person O
Mr.. Smiths intelligence. This is all | have
to say, and, having said it, 1 shall give tn,
matter no further attention.
Marion D, Shutter.