Keyword 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.

Eder finds in Mary Baker Eddy’s writings about masculinity that Christian Science could not be practiced only as an ethereal form of religion (caricatured as a woman) but reflect “a discernible and repeated thrust to extend the reach of Christian Science thought and practice beyond the sheltered sphere of nineteenth-century feminine religiosity into the proving grounds of the public realm.”

Siewers, of the Russian Orthodox faith and briefly, a National Correspondent for The Christian Science Monitor, observes there are no longer any prominent, mostly Republican, Christian Scientists in the U.S. Congress or White House, or visible in the arts and entertainment industry. He argues that the disappearance and decline of Christian Science is a precautionary tale for more traditional Christian communities.

Stahl’s study of the intertwined relationship between religion and the military opens a unique but revealing window on the role of religion in society. The distinctive role of Christian Science is sprinkled throughout the book. Hempstead Lyons, a Christian Science practitioner, sought to offer services, but the military’s failure to distinguish Christian Science from other groups resulted in excluding him.

Paulson provides a defense of Christian Science as Christian, citing two main points: 1) from earliest times there have been many Christianities of which Christian Science is one expression; 2) Eddy’s Christianity was born out of her difficult life experiences and search of scripture. She became “a Christian reformer, seeking to revitalize the Bible’s practical, transformative power.”

Willsky claims Mary Baker Eddy’s Science and Health (among other 19th-century works) was a reaction to the dogmatism of the Plain Bible ethos of American Protestantism. The predominant interpretation of the Bible as ‘plain’ meant its message, as understood by Reformed and evangelical Protestant culture, was authoritatively true. Eddy made the best attempt to modify this notion with divine healing revelations.

In an ecumenical context, Paulson illustrates common ground between the healing mission and Christian salvation of Christian Science which results in a transformed soul and body. But the lack of fellowship between Christian Scientists and other Christians could be due to lack of respect for women’s leadership on the one hand and arrogance on the other, resulting in isolation.

A scholar of American Religious Studies and Women’s Studies, Voorhees examines how 19th-century American social and religious movements impacted Eddy’s evolving first six editions of her book. Each edition provides a thematic window into how Eddy’s writing charted its own independent course. Voorhees explores Eddy’s rhetorical defense for her textbook as both discovery and revelation in spite of its many editions.

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.

Rapport argues that both Christian Science and the Unity School of Christianity came into being during an emerging scientific worldview, and implemented their “scientific rationale and language as a strategy to validate themselves in late 19th-century America.” But, whereas Unity used science to complement Protestantism, Eddy employed scientific language to defy mainstream science and religion.

Choi’s and Huff’s chapters explore how two 19th-century Christian women, Lucy Rider Meyer and Mary Baker Eddy respectively, interpreted Pauline and deuteron-Pauline texts to validate women’s empowerment in the Church. Hogan then details striking similarities between Meyer’s and Eddy’s approaches to these texts, and that of many recent feminist and womanist scholars.

Waldschmidt-Nelson meticulously presents, in German, the history and status of Christian Science in Germany from its beginnings to the present. It is based on a documented examination of historical records, published and unpublished writings ranging from panegyrical to dismissive, interviews and correspondence with representatives of the Christian Science church, the medical profession and the Christian clergy (both Protestant and Roman Catholic), and conversations with private individuals.

Weddle compares Jonathan Edwards’s, Ralph Waldo Emerson’s, and Mary Baker Eddy’s views on how each understood the connection of divinity with the human and natural world. In response to Emerson, Eddy asks from her Christian Science perspective: How could divine spirit bring forth from itself a world entirely opposite to itself? Either God is material or the world is spiritual.

The focus of Klassen’s study is the healing practice of mainstream Christians in the US and Canada during the early 20th century. She argues that it was unabashedly medicalized and modern and was supported by the therapeutic role of written texts. Christian Science enters the discussion as a perceived opponent with its innovative reading of biblical texts.

Michell examines the influences, and theological connections and differences, between the teachings of Mary Baker Eddy, Emma Curtis Hopkins, the 19th-century Woman’s movement, and the New Thought and New Age movements. Hopkins, unlike Eddy, would see Truth in all religions, not limited to Christianity, and focused more on a prosperity gospel.

Nineteenth-century technological advances, credited to a superior Protestant-Enlightenment heritage, empowered women (physically the weaker sex) to rule by intellectual and religious power, even as they held on to the carefully crafted ideology of female spiritual exceptualism which gave them a kind of knowing beyond the knowledge of the material world.

​​Braude looks at how the flourishing of Spiritualism in the mid-19th century intersected with the inception of the women’s rights movement in the same period. She documents that the most serious challenge to Spiritualism and mediumship came from the new religious movement Christian Science. However, although Mary Baker Eddy rejected Spiritualism outright, Braude finds many sympathetic Spiritualists in Eddy’s initial audience.

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).

This book’s study on the history of Christian theology in America includes Mary Baker Eddy’s contributions. Eddy’s theological treatise, Science and Health, distanced itself from literal interpretations of the Bible, interpreting central Christian elements in terms of mental experience. Porterfield finds Eddy’s theology coherent and more fairly understood as a remarkably creative if unschooled form of American Protestant thought. 

Robertson writes a comprehensive historical survey of music in the Christian Science faith. She explains the invaluable role music played as a spiritual foundation for Mary Baker Eddy’s founding of her Church. Robertson positions Eddy’s Church in the context of New England theological thought and praxis, demonstrating how it incorporated already existing music before creating its own new tradition.

In her chapter, “Alternative Religions in Nineteenth-Century America,” Lindley shows how this period of fermentation and experimentation fostered new Christian sects which challenged social, economic and religious orthodoxy. Christian Science is one of the four she highlights. Mary Baker Eddy, its founder, was a model of women’s revelatory and authoritative leadership who maintained overall control of her church.

Simmons’s chapter on Christian Science in the context of America’s 20th-century religious culture begins with an acknowledgment of Mary Baker Eddy’s “insight into a primary religious impulse of her time”–a time of social upheaval and challenge to the biblically oriented self-understanding of America’s destiny.

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.

​​Eight decades after Eddy’s passing, Nenneman addresses the question of the relevance of Christian Science in modern times. He acknowledges that for many mainline Protestant churches the language of religion has changed, and that Christian issues have also shifted from pressing doctrinal concerns toward social justice and personal moral issues. He concludes with the continued need for supporting Christian healing.

Tucker’s chapter on Christian Science is written in the context of a Protestant orthodox apologetic. Her resources include almost equal voices from Christian Science spokespersons and detractors, although her selection of topics is based on issues that matter most to her orthodox Christian perspective.

McDonald notes that most feminist and psychological explanations attribute the success of Christian Science not to its theological worth, but for its personal utility. These explanations ironically resemble the traditional reductionism assigned to public women by 19th-century men—ironic because a decade of feminist scholarship on Eddy has helped to reinforce patriarchy. McDonald examines these social, intellectual, and religious stereotypes.

Throughout Christian history those movements deemed heretical often included participation by women—including the much-criticized Christian Science founder, Eddy. Trevett wonders why Eddy, with all her germane experiences and theology, went mostly unnoticed by many feminist thinkers. She concludes Eddy’s nontraditional and non-creedal interpretation of scripture, contrary to most mainstream orthodox feminist scholars who critiqued patriarchal attitudes, contributed to the difficulties.

Johnsen claims that it was not mind cure, or Phineas P. Quimby (evaluated in detail) that influenced Mary Baker Eddy; rather it was the profoundly shifting Puritan tradition which infused the 19th-century “New England mind” and was the religious milieu out of which Christian Science emerged. Johnsen demonstrates how Eddy, with her Congregational background in tow, “carried forward certain essential dimensions of [Jonathan] Edwardsian thought and piety.”

Hansen examines the formative period of the Christian Science movement and discovers not only restorations of health but also healing as a religious act. From this, Hansen distinguishes Christian Science from the women metaphysical healers of the same period who eventually formed the New Thought movement. Eddy’s declaration, “This is woman’s hour” conveys the female contribution to Christian Science.

This Roman Catholic perspective on Christian Science respects its longevity and the simple quiet dignity of its churches, publications, and members. Although Mary Baker Eddy’s non-standard definitions of church, Jesus, and the Christ differ from orthodoxy, these Catholic authors consider Eddy’s views on celibacy and marriage favorably, and claims of healing as not fanatical, escapism, or insanity.

Gottschalk was a Christian Scientist whose 1973 book was a more frank presentation than previous accounts of Mary Baker Eddy’s life by an insider. For instance, although he claims that Christian Science is the only true Christian religion, he criticizes Christian Scientists for certain attitudes and behaviors that reveal a shallow understanding of Eddy and the rigor of Christian Science practice.

Cunningham depicted the complaints written and preached by clergy openly opposed to Mary Baker Eddy. Their offense was based on the juxtaposition of waning interest in old orthodoxies with the growth of Christian Science. Four main criticisms include 1) Eddy’s dubious relation to historic Christianity; 2) her teaching on evil; 3) her scheme of getting money; and 4) her hygienic risks.

Judah’s 1967 monograph on the metaphysical movements of 20th-century America remains a valuable resource for a comparison between movements and a documentation of their impact on organized Protestant Christianity.  Regarding Christian Science, Judah claims most of its basic biblical doctrinal points are similar to the beliefs of historic Protestantism, but their full explanations place them outside traditional Christian theology.

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.

Seal’s first-hand account of her missionary work in Germany (1931 to 1940) begins with her introduction to Christian Science. With no funding, knowledge of German, or prior contacts, but only the certainty that God had sent her, she went to Dresden. Though at times persecuted, people found her through the publicity of her healing works and by word of mouth.

Lea, not a Christian Scientist but a “Free Churchman,” mounts his 1915 defense of Christian Science by answering various questions raised by its clerical and medical critics who have been “blinded by professional and religious prejudices.” He builds his case through observing his “Personal Experiences of Christian Science Healing Work” (chapter XII) and including an appendix (F) of healing testimonies.

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.

Gottschalk’s 1980s update on Christian Science admits to seeing controversy on three fronts: intensified opposition from conservative Christians, the arrested development of open exchange between Christian Scientists and mainline Protestants, and a lack of honest confrontation necessary to address the controversies and dissonance within the Church.