Category Search Results

Christian Scientists from Chicago would convince a skeptical Mary Baker Eddy to participate in the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions with its message of unity among all religions. Although the address was enthusiastically received, its overall negative impact was the association of Christian Science with theosophy and Vedanta, and the crystalizing of opposition from the more traditional Christian Churches.

Voorhees offers new scholarship on a broad array of topics related to Christian Science identity focusing on reception history. With attention to fully resourced details and modern scholarship, Voorhees outlines the reception history of Christian Science in fields of religion, women studies, American history, politics, medicine, and metaphysics. She probes Mary Baker Eddy’s relationships with contemporary scholars, religion leaders, and students.

Within the context of how new Christian denominations relate healing systems with the Bible, Paulson cites different traditions that lie on the spectrum between continuationists who believe healing is still possible, such as the Christian Scientists, and the cessationists who see healing as ended with the apostles, and work with medicine for a cure. Christian Science spiritual healing mirrors Christ’s authority.

O’Brien’s interfaith reflections illustrate how sympathy can help bring heaven to earth—as evidenced in four women: Mary Baker Eddy, Emily Dickinson, Sarada Devi (wife and mission partner to Ramakrishna) and Simone Weil. O’Brien finds a basis for this sympathy in the common conviction found in many religions of “the experience of oneness between the supreme Spirit and everyday empirical reality.”

This chapter, written by the Church, provides information that will help health care providers understand the spiritual needs of Christian Scientists in a practical, clinical setting. Besides a background history of Mary Baker Eddy, the formation of the Church, and its foundational teachings, the chapter explains reliance on prayer for healing as an individual choice, and the adherence to law when it comes to infectious diseases.

Dericquebourg distinguishes those religious expressions where ontological salvation is their primary goal and purpose, from ‘healing churches’ (where he places Christian Science) where ontological salvation is also important, but the healing of mind and body is the heart of their faith and the authentication of their theology. He lists characteristics in common with other healing religions as well as their points of tension.

Kramer’s well-researched critique on Christian Science makes her arguments easier to understand than most critics. She grasps the fundamental teachings and history of the religion well, but she left it for doctrinal reasons. Most of Perfect Peril describes her emotional and intellectual struggles with doctrinal issues. Following a crisis of faith, she concluded that Christian Science is a dangerous mind control. 

This essay by an adherent of Christian Science accompanies the main article on Christian Science. Paulson describes her childhood experience and how her religious practice was her primary source of comfort and healing. She recognizes distinctions between Christian Science and orthodox Christianity and explains why she thinks the typical orthodox view of Christian Science’s similarity with Gnosticism is misleading. 

Hendrickson discusses the American history of metaphysical healing practices from Native Americans to the present and identifies characteristics of diverse types of healing. Mary Baker Eddy and Christian Science are discussed within the context of Quimbyism and New Thought, with the distinction made between the Christian basis of Eddy and the more materialistic, secular basis of the latter.

Although these contemporary authors never met, their mutual interest in sincere religion and the power of thought inevitably brought the two distinguished figures into a provocative relationship. The fact that he shifted his position on Christian Science several times indicates the conflict within his own worldview. It was no more insane than any other channel of human thought. Just more interesting.

Sandford gives a definitive account of the history of Christian Science in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) based on his experience as a U.S diplomat and extensive research in official GDR archives. He covers the country’s initial hostility toward Christian Science as a foreign institution, to a post-war relaxation of restrictions, to recognition and re-establishment of rights just before the Berlin Wall fell.

This article was an address for The Mother Church in Boston, July 9, 2012. Although Kinnamon’s prior exposure to Christian Science was based on stereotypes, he welcomed an opportunity to bring the Christian Science Church into ecumenical relationship. He explained that ecumenism is based on relationships of trust and witnessing the grace of God in one another—not striving for homogeneity.

Driessen’s chapter in a book about spiritual perspectives and clinical practices is devoted to the religious background, practice, and ethics of Christian Science treatment. Driessen, an officially recognized Christian Science practitioner, describes the theological foundation of the Christian Science worldview, the resources for healing, and the relationship of Christian Science ethics with the medical world.

The commonly mischaracterized and consequently overlooked relationship between Eddy and her former student, Gestefeld, should be re-examined because of its rich theological and biographical potential. Voorhees’s closer look at their correspondence indicates a mutually respectful relationship before they parted ways on grounds of theological differences—Gestefeld’s theosophical eclecticism versus Eddy’s unorthodox Christian particularism, and not because of Eddy’s authoritarian reasons.

Having grown up as a practicing Christian Scientist, Hagerty left the organized religion when she discovered she was more comfortable with medical help. But her experience raised unnerving questions about God, reality, and what she really believed. She concludes that Christian Scientists are more deliberate about pursuing the spiritual law. Its practice places a person in the path of spiritual power.

Christian Science is one of the eight religious communities examined because of their illustration of major sociological principles. Mary Baker Eddy is noted for having operated “outside the norms of what sociologists call expected gender role behavior.” The authors ask whether Eddy would rightly be considered charismatic and whether Christian Science would rightly be considered a ‘cult’ or ‘sect.’

Schuette, a former U.S. Army chaplain representing the Christian Science Church, cites records of the Christian Science chaplaincy during WWI and WWII. But his focus is on the post-WWII years where he presents insights into the service of Christian Science chaplains as well as the context and issues faced by chaplains of all faiths.

The Divine Healing Movement of the late 19th century attempted to reform evangelicalism by including healing. Curtis makes relevant comparisons with Christian Science, one of its better-known contemporaries, to highlight the rich history of Divine Healing. Their healing examples are quite similar. The relationship between faith healing evangelicals and Christian Science worsened, though, as they both matured and gained more followers.

Simmons contextualizes Mary Baker Eddy amidst the late 19th-century era of revolutionary change showing how her forebears (Swedenborgianism, Mesmerism, Transcendentalism and Spiritualism) “prepared the psychic way” by making explicit to “the American spiritual imagination the connection among physical, psychological, and spiritual health” (94). He reviews Eddy’s theology, the influence of Quimby, and the evolution of Christian Science as an institution.

This 2005 self-published memoir offers readers unfamiliar with the daily life and mindset of a Christian Scientist a firsthand account. The book is not heavily laden with religious teachings, but the author makes clear her routine application of basic Christian Science teachings to the challenges in her life, including her healthcare choices.

Medical practices have waxed and waned as part of Christian healing practices from antiquity. Porterfield devotes two pages to Mary Baker Eddy’s contributions as an heir to Wesley. Eddy’s engagement with mesmerism led her to relinquish many aspects of evangelical theology. In her break with the materialist elements of mesmerism, Eddy followed Quimby, but went beyond him with her biblical interpretation.

The book establishes an important framework for understanding the content selected for the faith groups within the New Religious Movements (NRM) study. The primary documents representing Christian Science include writings from Mary Baker Eddy and some testimonials. The description of Christian Science covers its metaphysical origins; its theological foundation; its practice of healing; and comparisons with mainstream Christian doctrine.

Griffith investigates the roots of Christian dieting and fitness and their present-day embodiments. One chapter explores 19th-century mind-cure movements, including Phineas P. Quimby, Christian Science and New Thought, with their connection between mind and matter. She sees in Mary Baker Eddy a contradiction between her radical stance on body as delusion and her rich living circumstances.

Fuller describes contributions of major figures in the history of American religion, with a focus on those whose contributions were controversial but ultimately highly influential. He considers Mary Baker Eddy the best-known of Quimby’s student-disciples, arguing that Eddy reworked Quimby’s ideas with more explicit connection to scriptural passages. But the Christian Science role in introducing Americans to metaphysical spirituality was enormous.

deChant argues that Christian Science should be included in a survey of the world’s religions because of its significant contributions to both American religious life and the world’s religions.He attributes the turmoil to Eddy’s direct and emphatic challenge to the status quo of American culture, calling into question the authority of two of America’s most venerable institutions —religion and medicine.

Stein defends not only the importance of allowing place for minority religions but also their ultimate value to society as a whole. He views them as contributing substantially to the vitality and creativity of the nation’s religious life. Christian Science is one of the ‘alternative religions’ he studies in the context of religious dissent in America.

This graduate level textbook on America’s religions intertwines a wide multitude of religious belief systems with the multi-faceted movements of American thought. Williams explains Christian Science in the context of 19th- and 20th-century American culture, which includes harmonialism, individualism, female empowerment, and cult–a term evangelists equate with theological deviancy but is otherwise characterized by charismatic leadership and isolation from the rest of the world.

Barrett’s approach to his survey of 21st-century “sects, cults, and alternative religions” is to present ideas according to predominant views of believers. Thus, Barrett presents material from the perspective of adherents of Christian Science, even though he cites the views of its critics as well. Acknowledging the Christian Science self-understanding as Christian, he also notes some major differences with mainstream Christianity.

Young’s thesis is that the rhetoric used in support of accommodations for medical exemptions must be exceptionally persuasive. She found that the chief means of persuasion by the Christian Science Church is its identification with two powerful ideas within its culture: science and religion. This rhetoric increases the likelihood that both Christian Scientists and nonbelievers will find common ground and interests.

Schoepflin includes short sections on the Seventh-day Adventists, Mormons and Christian Scientists, seeing them as movements which used science as a “tool for apologetics.” He shows how Mary Baker Eddy combined the tools of science (reason and empiricism—in the evidence of bodily healing) with “the spiritual and immaterial dimensions of Christianity” (311).

Jenkins argues that the cult problem of today is the product of cultural and political work and that Christian Science, with associated mind-cure movements, has been the primary target of cult critics. He joins the attacks by asserting (falsely): “Most pernicious, Christian Science denied the Virgin Birth, the miracles of Christ, the Atonement, and the Resurrection.” (60)  

In a time when science and medicine were intent on removing religion from their midst, both Eddy and White actively integrated physical and spiritual concerns in their theology and practice. Although Eddy named her religion Christian Science, logically claiming that its principles could be demonstrated with mathematical certainty, White’s claim to authority was validated by her public visions with signs following.

Taves’s work is a study of religious experience with a focus on the difference between the indwelling Spirit of God and a lively imagination. Although Mary Baker Eddy was a patient and student of Phineas Quimby’s, Taves identifies the crucial distinction between them through Eddy’s differentiation of spirit from matter. Quimby valued both states simultaneously whereas Eddy held them in complete opposition.

Jasen claims that when Christian Science was introduced in Canada, it provoked controversy of wide significance on subjects like the mind/body connection, faith and healing, and the hegemony of the medical profession. Because it effected marvelous cures, it couldn’t be dismissed. But it challenged the authority of physicians and clerics, making them consider issues that seldom intruded upon their separate spheres.

Stark researches the causes of success and failure in religious movements, focusing on Christian Science because of its dramatic rise and decline within short periods of time. He is interested in where ideas went and how they were embodied in social movements, such as the impact of Mary Baker Eddy’s authoritative style, women’s work opportunities, and fertility rates.

Gill, a feminist historian and biographer, offers a fresh view of Mary Baker Eddy’s achievements in the light of obstacles faced by women in her time. Without access to Church archives Gill relied on Peel’s archival research. Gill’s unique contribution challenges the traditional biographers’ view of Eddy as a hysterical invalid who abandoned her son and stole her ideas.

The Christian Science Church is one of the communities of faith depicted in the 1st edition of this book, which offers visitors a point of entry into unfamiliar faith community settings. Each tradition provides information about its history and beliefs, the basic service, guest behavior, dogma and ideology, and celebrations of life cycle events, such as birth, marriage, and funerals. 

Melton argues that the history of the Eddy-Quimby debates obscured other important historical facts, besides the truth about both Eddy and Quimby.  From Melton’s closer look at this case, he concludes that Evans could not be the founder of New Thought, and that Mary Baker Eddy—not Quimby—must be the true founder of Christian Science.

Melton’s uncovering of a largely forgotten history of the relationship between Mary Baker Eddy and Emma Curtis Hopkins provides historians of religion an insightful comparison between two successful women of the 19th century. Although the article’s focus is on Hopkins, her relationship with Eddy illustrates both similarities and dissimilarities in the women and their churches.

Braswell’s primary interest in his overview of Christian Science lies in the relationship between Christian Science and traditional Christianity. Braswell quotes extensively from the primary sources of Eddy’s own writings, highlighting those passages that answer questions from the viewpoint of Christian orthodoxy. The implication of his critique is based on his view that Christian Science is declining because of its deviation from orthodoxy.

Knee presents one of the most accurate and scholarly explanations then (1994) available on the relationship between Christian Science, Eddy’s former mentor, Phineas P. Quimby, and other American metaphysical religions. Knee also assesses the reactions of other faith communities toward Christian Science, especially Jews, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Protestants, and Swedenborgians.

Tucker had little access to primary or secondary source material to write her account of Mary Collson’s love-hate relationship with Christian Science. But her story reveals some of the complexities of a well-educated and energetic woman seeking to help the world, but who ultimately felt too confined by the domineering and cold-hearted attitudes she encountered in the Christian Science Church.

Mary Baker Eddy would transform her prophetic charisma into a set of bylaws (Manual of The Mother Church) which was meant to ensure institutional perpetuity, and act as a legal covenant for its members. Simmons highlights one British Church member, Annie Bill, who saw her own role as restoring charismatic leadership to the movement and creating an independent ‘Parent Church.’

Becker compares the striking similarities as well as the differences between the unorthodox history, writings, theology, and codified methods of healing of the founders of two religious movements: Miki Nakayama of Japan’s Tenrikyo, and Mary Baker Eddy of America’s Christian Science.

Schoepflin’s thesis is that in Christian Science, “healing the sick is a consequence of Christian Science practice and not its prime object.” He traces the history of the understanding among Mary Baker Eddy’s followers of what a healing practice is about–initially as a profitable vocation, to the need for gradual spiritual growth (more about religious practice than health care), and the opening up to the need for physical aid.

​​The 1987 death of a young child under spiritual treatment prompted Gottschalk’s clarification of how Christian Science parents approach care for their children. He makes the case that they stand by their commitment to their children’s health as well as their First Amendment right to practice their religious beliefs, because their experience with spiritual healing has proved reliable.

As the title of this 70-minute bibliographic video implies, its main message highlights Mary Baker Eddy’s lifelong struggles, determination, and persistence. This video precedes the opening of the Mary Baker Eddy Library by 14 years, and its excellent cast of characters make it a valuable resource especially for those unfamiliar with Eddy’s life and work.

Moore, a historian, places Mary Baker Eddy in her 19th-century social and religious context to examine why her movement was considered by many as ‘occult,’ and yet why so many sensible Americans flocked to Christian Science. “Christian Science (and the other outlier religious groups) grew as a perfectly ordinary manifestation of tensions that were always present in American society.”

​​From her Quaker perspective, Murphy argues that Bible readers ought to suspend criticism against Christian Science long enough to consider Eddy’s logic and healing implications of the Bible.  Murphy finds a parallel to the experience of George Fox in the Christian Science claim that the importance of healing is the light it lets through.

Volume two of Peel’s trilogy covers Mary Baker Eddy’s expanding years of 1877 to 1891, her crucial period of trial and error as she fights for the survival of her nascent movement. She organizes her church, clarifies her revolutionary interpretation of the Bible, and teaches pupils who will carry the message of Christian Science beyond New England to a wider world.

Merritt, a former member, laments that although Christian Science came as a challenge to orthodoxy, it soon spawned its own orthodoxy. He questions the tightly guarded institutionalizing of the Church, and came to oppose the extremist attitude prevalent in the 1960s against medical support in times of crisis, the over-spiritualization of sexual relations, and other extremist views. 

For Martin, a cult is any group diverging from his interpretation of “the fundamental teachings of historical Christianity.” He classifies Christian Science as anti-Christian, justifying his stance by placing 26 orthodox fundamentalist doctrines side-by-side with quotations from Mary Baker Eddy’s writings which are often taken out of context.

Peel analyzes 19th-century Transcendentalism in relation to the philosophy of Christian Science. These historical voices sometimes blended in metaphysical similarities, but the pragmatic nature of a Christian Science commitment to healing was ultimately incompatible with Transcendental idealism. 

This 1932 article shares the interview results with 61 African American ministers about their attitude toward racial divisions within Christian congregations and denominations. According to a sample of these ministers, Christian Science and Roman Catholicism were more friendly to people of color than mainstream Protestants. Racial prejudice appears not to have been a strong factor in choosing religious affiliation.

Fisher’s 1930 polemic attitude against Mary Baker Eddy is evident in sarcasm and storytelling without documentation. For example, he claims, “Her wealth of repetition is such that it cannot fail to extort from the attentive reader a sentiment of bewildered and fatigued respect” (85-6) and that her “brains have been employed in the exploitation of a creed.” (81)

The significance of Simonsen’s 1928 publication today is its historical and theological contribution. His personal account provides an insight to the reception of the new American movement.  After ineffective medical help with his rapidly deteriorating health, he tried Christian Science and was healed after one visit with a Christian Science practitioner. He tackles deep personal and theological questions.

Johnson’s eye-witness account explains Mary Baker Eddy’s decisions during the period in which she established her church. Succeeding generations have wondered why Eddy created a church with a self-perpetuating Board of Directors and how some of her followers, such as Nixon, Woodbury, and Foster-Eddy posed such threats to the church. He discusses Eddy’s responses to internal power struggles within the movement.

If Bellwald had had access to archival resources on Christian Science, he might have made a more accurate comparison between Christian Science and Roman Catholicism of the early twentieth century. His organizational approach to his study is well conceived, but he combines the resources of blatant polemics, Milmine and Peabody, with his own Catholic perspectives to denounce Christian Science.

​​Stanger’s summary of Karl Holl’s article, “Scientismus,” in Der Herold is an appreciation of the thoroughness, accuracy, and sympathetic perspective of Holl’s overview of the Christian Science Church, its founder, Mary Baker Eddy, and its doctrines. Holl wrote for criminologists from the perspective of a non-Christian Science scholar, to correct the prejudice and injustice evident in many writings critical of Eddy.

Kratzer’s article, “Dominion Within,” won praise from Mary Baker Eddy, but he was later excommunicated from the Christian Science Church. His articles (both before and after severance from the church) were similar to contemporary blog posts, consisting of his thoughts on the practical application of Christian Science toward the issues of his day.

This extremely important report covers the court trial, the ‘Next Friends’ suit against Mary Baker Eddy, which was dismissed. It includes records of pre-trial publicity, court proceedings, and press interviews, and is an important study for the American history of religion, the struggle between religion and science, medical and psychiatric history, legal precedence, and the powerful, long-lasting impact of yellow journalism. 

The contemporary importance of this brief article written in 1889 by Hannah Larminie lies in its theological explanations of Christian Science. It provides some answers to the oft-repeated question about what the correct understanding of Christian Science doctrine is vis-a-vis the mainstream adoption of the Apostles’ Creed. A brief theological interpretation follows each line of the Creed.

Gestefeld had been an adoring student of Mary Baker Eddy’s until she felt ready to extend her own ideas beyond her teacher. She thought of herself as evidence of the natural progression of what Christian Science should be. But she opposed Eddy’s strict boundaries, and the trajectory of Gestefeld’s writing moved toward eclectic views, contrary to Eddy’s particularism.