The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1908-12-13

and can express nothing else. With |
such an understanding the argument is |
wholesome, truthful and effectual. 1t
is based upon the eternal science OF
God and its result is sure. DIR. Worces- |
ter argues to the child you do not wish
to be a liar. You know it is wrong,
but he gives no reason why the child
does not wish TO be liar, nor why
the child knows it is wrong. Therefore
there is nothing in the suggestion per
Sc which could convince the child.
If the child is taught that to be un
truthful is TO deviate from Truth, God,
and thus defect from his real individ-
uality as Gods child. and that the evil
results of lying are thus perpetuated
and that the child knows that lying
is wrong" because such practice is out
of keeping with it's true self as the re-
Election of God, good. there is reason
for the hope within. There is basis
of conviction and the argument of
truth is permanently efectual If. how
ever, a child is told You do not wish
to be a liar" and he has no reason for
believing this except the mere fact that
he is being told SO, his acceptance of il
can not be more than temporary. If he
is taught q scientific truthful reason
why he does not wish to be liar, the
conviction is likely to be lasting, for its
foundation is in truth. 1t is more than
mere suggestion. Mark the suggestion
You will do just what tell you for you
and / are good friends" Is 1t safe TO
accept an argument simply because one
1 is on friendly terms with the one VINO
presents il, or simply because 1t IS MS
declaration? 1t is only safe TO accept
and act upon that which is positively
| right and we can always be sure that
! we are right if we are arguing from
| the standpoint that God is good, that
! the child is His likeness and manifests
| only the good characteristics of Good
/ Take DR.. Worcester's argument GU
| are brave boy" The question is,
! where is the evidence, since the senses
declare that he is not brave boy? lie
! who believes material evidence could
not believe that the child is brave
boy, and for such a one to declare that
| he is a brave boy is to declare what the
! suggestionist believes to be falsehood-
There could, therefore, be no effect
| from such an argument except In the
will force that presents It. The argu-
ment in itself could have no force what
ever Is this method scientific? is
! there anything about 1T that is definite,
| precise or accurate? In what way does
/ it suggests Jesus method? Take again
the argument, you will be able to
speak without hesitation or stammer-
ing" What is the basis of such an ar
gument? If it is founded upon the
1 prospect of Improvement it is not based
4 upon a certainty and at best could be
i nothing more than wish that the pa
4 tient might be able to speak without
/ stammering. Is such a suggestion more
4 rational than the argument of the
Christian Scientist that stammering is
no part of Gods child. no part of God
creation. that the child itself is spirit
ual and perfect and there is therefore
4 no inperfection in him? Such ar
1 gument is founded upon the everlasting
Il truth. It is advanced with positive
4 assurance by the practitioner and car
ries strong conviction to the patient. 1t
i corrects the false sense of mans true
nature and the Ills attending this false
Il sense therefore depart.
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE VERSUS
MENTAL SUGGESTION
i Although we may concede to every
non naIeTldt UletHUuf ny WDiCH icSuits
i are sought, the propriety OF being
4 called mental. yet we must learn ia
mark the distinction between that
J which is mortal-that which results
from the action of the so-called mortal
{ mind-and that which Is spiritual and
[ immortal, the action of the divine Mind
{ 1t is not always easy to determine
!, from external observation. the differ
ence between the effect of Christian
Science and that of mental suggestion
i for, so far as concerns the outward APP
pearahce, the improved condition of the
: beneficiary of mortal mind influence is
II very similar to that OF a beneficiary oil
) Christian Science. The chief distinc-
4 ton is likely to be seen in the menta
& and moral status of the individual. Je-
sus knew this when He counseled thai
t we Judge not according to the appear
ance but judge righteous Judgment
) 1t is sometimes possible to produce
81 changes in the physical condition of {
subject through the influence of morta
l mind because of the close Relationship
$ between thought and the bodily organ