Webster City freeman. [volume] (Webster City, Hamilton County, Iowa) 1884-1946, 1917-10-09
DEFENDS DR.. WALTON AUBBARD'S
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE LECTURE

her numerous writings, her high
Christian character, her well-known
standing as citizen in her COM
munity, all combine to disprove and
to nullify any and all such criticisms
or lisparagement of her life-work
!, emanating from the opponents OF
Christian Science.
Even mark Twain who in his
writings took occasion. to criticise
Mrs. Eddy, in his final opinion OF
her stated CLOSELY examined, pains
takingly studied, she is easily the
most interesting person on the plan
ct, and in several ways, is easily the
most extraordinary woman that was
ever born upon it" Mark Twain,
page 1887.
The Christian Science textbook,
Science and Health, with Key to the
Scriptures, Notwithstanding our
critics aspersions, has indeed proved
itself to be the key to the Scrip
lures for thousands of people, who
| were formerly AFFILIATED with other
| churches, as we'll as for thousands OF
others who never had any church
affiliation. So far as the biblical
scholarship" of Christian Scientists
| is concerned, it will compare favor
ably with any other class of religion
| lists. Criticism of this ignores the
| fact that Christian Science lecturers
ard writer's necessarily attribute au-
thorship of certain books of the BIZ
bic to their supposed authors as des-
| ignated in the King James version
Of the Bible, simply for the purpose
cf definitely placing certain quota
lions. Doubtless Mr.. Metcalf has al
so done this.
II is only just, to state that there
are men in the ranks of Christian
Science who are fully as capable OF
determining the exact origin of any
particular Scriptural citation as any
Of its critics.
+ Mr.. Metcalf objects to the terms,
Life, Truth and Love-" as synonyms
for God, and yet all these terms are
Scriptural. He particularly objects
to the term Principle" as defining
God. In this connection Mrs. Eddy
states, Message to The Mother
Church, 1901, pagej and ~ I'VE
God is personal in sci
entific sense, but is not corporal
ia 49,, 49,; 4. We t-=,sA
stand that God is not finite. He is
the infinite Person, but not three
persons in one Person. Christian
Scientists are THESIS and Monothe-
lists. Those who misjudge us because
we understand that God is the in
finite One instead of three, should
be able to explain Gods personality
nationally. Christian Scientists con-
sistently conceive of God as One, be-
cause He is infinite, and as triune
because He is Life, Truth, and Love,
and these three are one in essence
and in office.
If in calling God divine Princi-
ple,' meaning divine Love, more fire.
quently than Person, we merit the
epithet Goddess" we naturally con-
clude that he breaks faith with his
creed, or has no possible conception
OF ours, who believes that three per-
sons are defined strictly by the word
Person, or as One, for if Person is
| God, and he believes three persons
constitute the Godhead, does not Per-
son here lose Monotheism, and be-
come less coherent, than the Chris
tian Scientists sense of Person as
one divine infinite triune Principle,
named in the Bible Life, Truth,
Love? for each Of these possesses
the nature of all, and God omnipo-
tent, omnipresent, Omniscient."
Mr.. Metcalf also objects to the
Christian Science teaching that God s
creation is necessarily perfect and
states: AS matter of fact, God
has made nothing perfect Let us
examine this. The Bible states, Gem
esis 1871. "And God saw everything
that He had made, and behold it was
very good" and again we read, John
1:3: "All things were made by Him
and without Him was not anything
made that was made" When Jesus
enjoined his disciples, Matthew
5:4S: BE We therefore perfect, even
as your Father which is in heaven is
perfect" was he also indulging
"pious camouflage?"
Christian Scientists will very will
lingly admit that the human concept
Of creation is extremely imperfect,
and that human sense has not yet
discerned, either perfect God, perfect