The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1908-12-20


noses of the most learned and expert
enced physicians in dealing with such
pronounced cases upon
what evidence can il be decided that
Christian Science does not heal organic
diseases? IL the line of demarkation
between organic and functional disor-
ders Is so blurred" that even the ex-
perts can not discern it, may IL not az.
ter all be true that there is no line o.
except in mistaken be-
lief? After all the cause of disease
lies deeper than functional or organic
ills.-the real cause is mental, a fact
the mental condition of he patient
the body responds accordingly.
Those who take the position that or.
ganic troubles can not be cured by
spiritual means, but must be left TO
the medical practitioner. declare in
substance that the headings of Jesus
were confined TO functional disorders.
On the other hand il they admit that
Jesus healed organic diseases. they
must admit that those in this age of
the world who heal according to his
method will be able to do likewise.
Christian Scientists are we'll aware
of their short comings. their inability
TO produce the full fruitage of Chris
tian Science, owing to their present
insufficient spirituar apprehension.
But they have proved by Experience
that they may do more for themselves
and others with Christian Science and
without material remedies than they
have formerly been able to do with
material remedies and without Chris
tan Science. and I his justifies the
position which they take. There may
be some exceptions to the rule which
we have mentioned. some extreme
cases that would justify a modifica-
ton of the Christian Scientists rcgu-
lar practice. and il is left with the
Judgment of the individual student To
attempt only that which observation
and experience convinces him may be
undertaken with a reasonable degree
of success.
Compensation.
One of the criticisms made by some
of the advocates of [ he Emmanuel
Movement is that Christian Scientists
accept fee while the new plan is con-
Quoted without fee. 1t is not In the
spirit of retaliation but with considera-
BILE reluctance that we call our read
ers attention to the fact that, while
In the Emmanuel Church at Boston no
fee is exacted by those who practice
suggestion we are informed by DIR.
Worcester that no patients are ac-
cepted for treatment whose cases have
not first been diagnosed and passed
upon by gular physician. and that
during heir course of treatment they
are frequently examined by a ply
stefan who charges a fee for his serv
ice. T he writer happens 10 know of a
lady who applied for help at this insti-
tuition She was referred first TO one
physician and then to another. Each
charged her a fee of $1,000 for an ex-
animation. Please note that this ex-
pense of $1,000 was incurred while un-
der the direction of those in
charge OF the Emmanuel Move
ment. 1t should also be noted
that 5000 pays for four weeks sery-
ice from the most proficient Christian
Scientist practitioner. DIR. McComb
declares that free will offerings are
accepted for the support of his move
ment. This is an admission that after
all every self-respecting person who
is able is expected to pay In order to
balance accounts with his own con-
science. Many surely would consider
an honest charge the better plan for
he nd 4 ha
Moreover the argument that I he ac-
ceptance of a fee for service rendered
is unChristian is borne out neither by
experience nor by Scriptural teach
ing.
1t is generally conceded that IL is
not only abnormal but also unjust to
accept something for nothing. Al
though one individual might be will
ing to serve another without compen-
sation. the question arises: would it he
fair for the other TO accept the service
without giving an equivalent therefori
| II is not only wrong TO be selfish. but
| IL is also wrong TO educate selfishness
| in another. and indeed to use the priv
/ ilege of serving another without COM
pensation as an opportunity TO be un-
selfish and thus win the praise Of
our fellows is itself selfish. for what
ever of unselfishness is gained in the
/ transaction is gamer at the expense
of the supposed beneficiary and by
/ leaving him in his selfishness. Tie
self respect of the community is main
I tanned by the generally accepted rule
that every individual should be prop
| erly compensated for a service rem
dered another. Jesus said The labor
er is worthy of his hire which Of
course means that he is worthy of a
! proper remuneration. There might be
a difference of opinion as to what
1 would constitute extortion or over
charge. but so far as is within the
1 judgment of those concerned the fee
| charged for a service should be an
/ equivalent for he service rendered.
+! So long a clergymen are receiving an
/ adequate salary from their congrega-
ton they may forego the privilege Of
accepting a fee from individuals who
| apply to them for help. and we think
they would be justified in declining a
fee under such circumstances provided
j the individual beneficiary contributes