Milford chronicle., 1926-05-21
CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS
AND PROHIBITION

AND PROHlBlTION
New allies of the antiprohibition
forces are trying to make it appear
that the Christian Scientists of the
United States are divided on the liq-
uOr question. 1t is even asserted in
glaring headlines that MARY Baker
Eddy Opposed Prohibition" and the
effort is made thereby to mislead her
followers. Mary Baker Eddy advo-
Gated prohibition before she discov-
cred Christian Science. At Lynn,
Mass, in 1864, she became a men,
Der of the Independent Order of Good
Templars, and soon became rne of
the officers and one of the speakers
of the local lodge of this order. Long
afterward other members and Off
GERS of this lodge have recalled and
related that Mrs. Eddy's part in its
meetings always was noticeable as
being dignified, courteous, effective
and impressive (Life of Mary Baker
Eddy, 1928 edition, p. 11S).
When Mrs Eddy Joined the Good
Templars, the platform of this order
included the following planks: ITO
tai abstinence from all intoxicating
liquor as a beverage" and THE abso-
lutte prohibition of the manufacture,
importation and sale of intoxicating
liquors for such purposes" At that
time, also, each of the lodges held a
meeting every week, attended by
both sexes, which provided excel
lent education in parliamentary
practice" and kept constantly be-
fore the minds of members the prin-
ciples of total abstinence and pro-
hibition" (History of the Independ-
ent Order of Good Templars by the
Rev. T. F. Parker (188D, p. 1881.
AS a Christian Scientist, Mrs Ed
dy maintained the same position.
Thus she said: Whatever intoxi-
Gates a man, stultifies and causes
him to degenerate physically and
morally. Strong drink is unques-
tionably an evil, and evil cannot be
used temperately: its slightest use is
abuse; hence the only temperance is
total abstinence" miscellaneous
Writings. PIP. 288-289). Moreover, it
was part of her politics ito help
support a righteous government"
(AIiscellany, p. 276). There is not a
word in Mrs. Eddy's writings which
can be fairly construed to indicate
that she would have been in favor
of modifying in any degree a consti-
tuition or law prohibiting the sale of
Intoxicating drink.
Among the Christian Science
churches and their members there is
today no doubt as to the position
they should hold on this question.
The chief executive authority of the
church is the Board of Directors of
The First Church of Christ, Scien-
tist, in Boston, Mass. This body, on
the fifteenth of April last, adopted
the following resolutions and caused
them to be presented to the Senate
Judiciary Committee:
Whereas, A determined effort is
being made by the opponents of the
prohibition law OF the United States
to invalidate the operation of that
law and to legalize again the sale of
intoxicating liquors in this country,
be it
Resolved, By The Board of Direc-
tors of The First Church of Christ,
Scientist in Boston, Massachusetts,
that as citizens and as Christian
Scientists we do hereby pledge our
hearty support to the Eighteenth
Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, AMI to the feder-
al enforcement law enacted under
that amendment; and be it further
Resolved, That we denOunce the
endeavor to repeal that Amendment.
or to modify, in the direction of
greater latitude, the Volstead Act as
an effort to re-establish the traffic in
alcoholic liquor, and as Il menace to
the industrial, economic, social and
moral welfare of the people of the
United States.
The organization of the Christian
Science Church provides for COM
plete local self-gOvernmen+. But
with one accord the branch churches
and individual Christian Scientists,
followed the action of the Board of
On the day set aside for
this purpose by the Senate Commit
tee. resolutions uphOlding prOhibi-
ton were presented from 2S3 ChrisI
ton Science churches and IS socie-
ties, together with kilograms from
sos individuals. other hundreds of
such communications too late to get
into the official record, have come to
the Washington office of The Chris
ton Science Monitor and are still
To date they number 615
from churches, 235 from societies,
and 1900 from individuals. Not one
official declaration from an authoriz-
ed church hostile to prohibition can
be cited.
Any effort to make it appear that
there is dissension among Christian
Scientists upon this issue is obvi- .
1usly misleading and must fail. The
of Christian Science, and
Founder of this newspaper, wrote of =,
he insidious effort of error to un-
iermine law: Certain elements in
human nature would undermine the
,ivic. social, and religious rights
md laws of nations and peoples,
striking at liberty, human rights, and
elf-government-and this, too, in
he name of God, justice, and human
ty!" (Message to The Mother
Ihurch for 1900, p. 10)-Christian
Science Monitor.
/