Independent Christian Science articles

Law and Creation

From the June 7, 1930 issue of the Christian Science Sentinel by


Law implies order, and it has been well said that “order is Heaven’s first law.” It is inconceivable that man and the universe could have been created contrary to definite supreme law, or could be maintained without it. It must be accepted as a truism that the Maker of all is necessarily able and willing to take care of all His creation. To assert any other theory is to question the goodness and the omnipotence of the creator. Where, then, shall rest the responsibility for the discordant conditions attending human experience, unless we accept the statement of the Preacher, “God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.”

Mrs. Eddy defines God in “Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures” (p. 465) as “incorporeal, divine, supreme, infinite Mind, Spirit, Soul, Principle, Life, Truth, Love.” Each of these synonyms is complete within itself, yet it requires the complement of all the others to make each one of them fully understood. Students of Christian Science feel that the term “Principle” conveys a very satisfying idea of God’s nature. Certainly it has a peculiarly profound meaning when considered in connection with the other synonyms for God given by Mrs. Eddy. For instance, the realization that Love and Principle are the same at once destroys any thought of Principle as being cold and abstract. The careful reader will note that our Leader does not say that God is a principle; instead, she defines Him as “Principle,” the sole and only Principle or cause of all that exists.

The wise man has said, “Whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it.” God’s law is immutable, unchangeable, and can never be amended. A noted philosopher once declared that if he were to see a lump of lead suspended in mid-air without visible support, he would know at once that a hitherto unknown law had become manifest, and not that a law had been violated. The “miracles” of the Bible are very generally believed to have resulted from some temporary or special suspension of law. Yet a little consideration should convince anyone that a law which can be even momentarily set aside ceases to be a law. Mrs. Eddy says (Science and Health, p. 135), “The miracle introduces no disorder, but unfolds the primal order, establishing the Science of God’s unchangeable law.”

But, asks one, can it rightly be said that God is powerless to reverse His own decrees on occasion? Christian Science emphasizes the omnipotence of God; but is it not plain that if omnipotence could annul its own work in the second instance, it must have been less than omnipotent in the first instance? The universe of God is not divided against itself; hence the fact remains that good cannot reverse itself.

A law that is good on one occasion is good on all occasions. If God’s law could be set aside in one instance, the possibility of its suspension would continually confront us. It must, then, be evident that if the divine economy depended on such an unstable basis, the universe would be reduced to chaos. There is no element of chance in the divine plan. It must therefore be true that creation is not the result of an accidental conjunction or cooperation of material elements or forces. If the universe and man were the result of chance or accident, what hope could we have for their harmony or permanence?

Is it not plain that an orderly and enduring creation must perforce be on an absolutely spiritual basis? This spiritual basis must uncompromisingly contradict any material conception of creation, whether the theory of a man made from dust and a woman formed from his rib, or that man and the universe were evolved by material forces which have no relation whatever to Spirit. Christian Science repudiates both of these beliefs and stands squarely on the logical, orderly, spiritual, and scientific account of creation as given in the first chapter of Genesis and the opening verses of the second chapter. To declare that there are two separate and distinct creations, one spiritual and one material, is to accept the incongruous hypothesis of two supreme beings, or else to argue that God has a dual nature. Creation—man and the universe—is the spontaneous expression or reflection of the supreme Lawgiver. Mrs. Eddy states the case clearly when she says (ibid., p. 267): “The great I am made all ‘that was made.’ Hence man and the spiritual universe coexist with God.”

God’s law is ever operative, but this becomes apparent only as it is understood. This may be illustrated by the law of mathematics, which never ceases to act. Everywhere and under every condition twelve times twelve make one hundred and forty-four. Yet this fact is not available unless it is perceived. So it is with spiritual laws. They remain unchanged throughout eternity. They work unceasingly, and ignorance of them is the only thing that ever makes them seem inoperative in human experience. Christ Jesus clearly understood the laws of God, good; hence, he could unfailingly demonstrate them. To him there was no law of matter. He annulled so-called material law when he turned the water into wine. He showed the impotence of the so-called law of gravity when he walked on the water. He reversed the law supposed to govern supply when he fed the five thousand. And in the case of others, and finally in his own experience, he destroyed the spurious laws of sin, disease, and death. All these demonstrations were in strict consonance with spiritual law, in which matter or evil has no place or power.

Jesus said, “He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also;” and he meant exactly what he said. Then why talk of a day of miracles past and gone, when God’s power is available throughout eternity for those who are ready to utilize it? Christian Scientists rejoice that through an increasing understanding of spiritual law they are able to demonstrate it better; and they regard with satisfaction the significant reversal of so-called material law which is taking place in the world to-day. They recognize, however, that orderly revelation must be cumulative, and that progressive perception of God’s unchanging law is possible only through the consistent demonstration of spiritual understanding as it comes to them.


Classification and Limitation

From the June 7, 1919 issue of the Christian Science Sentinel by


In that wonderful chapter on Genesis, which is a very important part of the Christian Science textbook, “Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,” Mrs. Eddy in her analysis of the allegory of material creation says (p. 528), “Beholding the creations of his own dream and calling them real and God-given, Adam—alias error—gives them names.” This has been a failing of mortal man in every age, and thus it has come about that, once subscribing to the reality and necessity of disease, the next step has been to classify it as acute or chronic, organic or functional, of mild or of serious import. Christian Scientists have largely mastered this false concept, and yet it requires constant watchfulness on their part to avoid being ensnared by its insidious suggestion.

Even the apostles seem to have been mesmerized by the belief that some special difficulty confronted them in their efforts to heal the demoniac boy. Jesus, however, proved that this form of error was no more difficult to destroy than any other type of evil, and he rebuked his followers for their failure, in the words, “This kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.” Clearly Jesus did not mean that this particular form of disease presented any obstacle to healing, for the sequel shows otherwise; rather did he seek to impress the lesson that by true spiritual prayer, with its consequent fasting from the false evidence of the material senses and from their Adam habit of classification, a case such as this would be dissolved into its native nothingness as readily and as completely as any so-called minor type of error.

Just as no student of mathematics was ever healed of the belief that two and two are five by one who also trusted in that fundamental error as if it were the truth, so one cannot be truly healed of diseases or sins by another who believes in their reality. The nothingness of any error is proved when the error is overcome through purely spiritual means; for to the thinker it must be plain that realities, or in other words, God-created things, cannot be destroyed. In Christian Science, therefore, disease is regarded as unreal because it is subject to destruction, and nothing can never be more than nothing, whether it calls itself an infinitesimal microbe or claims to be a veritable mountain of error. The size of a cipher does not determine its value, for whether large or small it is still a cipher.

If God, good, is omnipotent, as the Scriptures clearly indicate, then right must be all-powerful. It must, then, follow that whatever is right is possible of attainment and is in fact natural and normal. Omnipotent good is not all-powerful in some cases and powerless in others, for the thinker will readily perceive that degenerate omnipotence involves a contradiction. Error’s only claim to power arises from mortal consent to believe in its genuineness, and when the entire overcoming of disease reveals its falsity it is thus proved that its assertions were never more substantial than the false mathematical concept which is obliterated by education. In the one case the thing to be rectified is a mistake manifested physically and in the other a mistake expressed numerically. In the light of Truth a mistake may be seen as a mistake, and regardless of the nature it attempts to assume it is at once corrected by knowing the truth about it. Superficial knowledge is not sufficient to destroy error, but some degree of spiritual understanding is requisite.

If it be once admitted that some mistakes or claims of error are stronger than others, the corresponding admission must be made that such claims are more difficult to destroy. Jesus never stopped to argue this question from any angle. He overcame sin and sickness simply through the understanding of the allness of Spirit and the consequent nothingness of matter in all its forms and with all its accompaniments; and this understanding enabled him to heal the withered hand, to restore lost sight, to open deaf ears, to walk on the water, to get the tax money from the fish’s mouth, and to raise the dead as readily as to heal Peter’s wife’s mother of a fever or to make a good woman of Mary Magdalene. In each case the work was accomplished through the same metaphysical process, and this method is defined by Mrs. Eddy on page 476 of Science and Health as follows: “Jesus beheld in Science the perfect man, who appeared to him where sinning mortal man appears to mortals. In this perfect man the Saviour saw God’s own likeness, and this correct view of man healed the sick.”

There can be no possible necessity for any action outside of God, and this admission at once places all action on a spiritual basis. This fundamental premise once conceded, there remains neither excuse nor apology for error of any name or nature. “Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you,” asked Paul, “that God should raise the dead?” Why should it be thought that God is capable of creating man and yet is incapable of taking care of him? It is readily acknowledged that the carpenter who builds a house can repair it, that the mechanic who constructs an engine can replace the worn or missing parts; and yet so perverse is mortal reasoning that it denies to God the sustaining power which it arrogates to itself. From this false reasoning arises the belief that inanimate drugs or the surgeon’s knife can accomplish things which God either can not or will not do. To say that God will not heal those in need of healing is to make Him a sinner, while to say that He cannot heal is to leave the creator out of His own creation.

Chemists tell us that the human body itself is composed of the very simplest chemical elements, are that these elements are in turn sustained or destroyed by chemical action. In fact, the ramifications of this belief in chemical necessity are surprising when subjected to analysis. However, that is another story. Can an assumed law of chemistry annul or even temporarily set aside the immutable law of omnipotent Mind? Can matter supersede Spirit at any point of action? The knowledge that matter can neither create substance nor destroy substance must be preceded by the understanding that so-called matter is not substance, and this fact spiritually understood will heal the most malignant type of disease as surely as it will destroy so-called milder forms. To light there are no degrees of darkness, and the same candle which would light a moderately dark room will serve to light the same room at blackest midnight. This is not to say that in considering that form of error which the world denominates as sin, no distinction should be made between murder, for instance, and some venial phase of wrongdoing; but it must be evident that every form of sin is the same in essence and subject to healing by one and the same method.

Jesus never used or recommended any other than spiritual methods, and that Christian Science is but the rediscovery of his Christly plan is proved by the untold thousands of cases of healing of all manner of diseases through the understanding of Mrs. Eddy’s explanation of his simple, never failing process. His diagnosis and classification were always from a spiritual standpoint; therefore his healing power knew no limitations. The consistent Christian Scientist will not be intimidated by error of any kind, but trusting in the never failing strength and goodness of God, “who healeth all thy diseases,” he will go forth to meet the boasting Goliaths of evil and confront the roaring lions in his path, as confidently and as unafraid as he chases away “the little foxes, that spoil the vines.” “Remember,” says Mrs. Eddy on page 149 of Miscellany, “thou canst be brought into no condition, be it ever so severe, where Love has not been before thee and where its tender lesson is not awaiting thee.”



Love is the liberator.