7
January 20, 1908. }
but I shall be very pleased to explain the mattr verbally if he cares to make an appointment. (4) As regards the question about Mrs. Edly, I can only say that Mark Twain's unwarranted and unmanly attack on an aged and highly respected woman has not only been refalei buf has aroused the protest of every right minded man and woman acquainted with Mrs. Eddy's life and works. Her entire life has been devoted to the good of others, in spite of which, like every other great leader of thonght, she bas constantly been made the object of misrep. resentation and slander,
J
Mr. and Mrs. Duan, who have lately visited her home, would gladly testify to the qu'et simplicity of her surroun lings while the love and respect accorded to her by all classes of the town of Concord near which she lives, effectually confate the old saying that prophet is not without houour save in his own country."-I am, Sir, Your obedient Servant.
H. F. T. FISHER, MAJOR Army Service Corps.
*
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE DAILY PRESS,”]
a
818, I am obliged to Major Fisher for the courteous reference to my very reasonabla'
return should say that while query, and in I have never y t got any of my Christian Scientist acquaintances to "talk Rugli 1," I Lave usually fouud them very patient and good- tempered, in fact, good Christians. This is distinctly in their favour, that they avoid the "odium theologicum in the way they do. am sorry, however, that Major Fisher shi ks the answering of my simple question. Surely it is capable of a brief auswer in plin English, or plain metaphysical English. I cannot accept his kind offer of a personal app ialment and explanation, and trust he will see the advis. ability of answering the question as publicly as it was put. May I simplify it for him? Is there any real reason why he Christian Science "treatment of a case of caucer in the jaw should not be as effio cious to remore twaɑ days stubble on the chin? zurely that do s not require "100 mach metaphysical discussio...“?
Yours truly.
1
UNSCIENTIF C CHRISTIAN, [This is certainly the shrewdest poser we have
80 far had, and we offer
any competent "Christian Scientist reasonable space for ite answer. It may interest raders to know that the letter has reference to au actual local case.-En.]
TO THE EDITOR OF THE
DAILY PRYSS."}
SIR,-In answer to the loog letter in this morning's papar from Major H. F. T. Fisher, I would like to say a few words.
་་
(1) Christian Science has not been before the Hongkong public "for the last forty years." Until the Daly Press threw light on it, none of my family knew that it had any following here at all, and I personally am glad you are trying to "nip it in the bud,“ Dowey tried to enlist follow ra in this part of the world, and it is to our credit as a community
that he failed.
|
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
43
(5) I would like to be certain that, where the | respondant; but there is no coutra liotion law demands the requisition of a doctor, all in the statements which you mention as having "Christian-Scientist parents loyally oby. been made to you by the two representatives of How can your correspondent be sure of that? the Christian Science Society of Hongkong- I have heard quite lately that a local adherent of whom I wis not one. told a friend of mine that though she called the doctor to her children, she had not troubled to follow the treatment he prescribed.
(6) The evasion of another correspondent's query, cs to why a Christian Scientist should, trouble to shave, was just what I expected.
"
|
I may say that the following of Christian Scienes in America, Eugland, and Austral a includes a great many men who have proved their intellectul saneness at the University, in Medicine, at the Bur, in the Army and Navy, in jurnalism, and in Commerce. When 1 assure you that I have been physically and mentally befitted by Christian Science, an i that I have personal and intimate knowledg of its truths by its works, I do not wish to appear as aflicking the medical pr·fession, ex- pecially as thros of my near relatives have practised medicine. With best wishes to you and other criti ́s -- Yours truly,
(7) How WAS Mark Twain's criticism unwarranted and unmanly Mrs. Eddy submitted her ideas for public acceptance or refusal, at a price. As a public writer, it was Mark Twain's day to write what he had dis- covered about another public writer, who, more orer, was not relying only on her literary style (like him) for support. One might as well say it is "uumauly of an upright judge to con. demu a female criminal. If Mrs. Eddy was not The unva-ying good temper displayed makes. rich before she published her book, if she has us regret the necessity of criticising snch love. not made money out of it, how comes it tha! able people. The two gentlemen referred to in her own relatives should have been fighting Lour last article called again yesterday, and over her estate.
Yours truls.
suggestol, in the friendliest possible way, that PATER FAMILIAS. it was "hardly playing the game to base au We hare omitted the end of this letter, for article on a private interview." We must at
:
L'al the
+
Al
interview
S. KINGSBURY.
this reason. It cannot affect the issue at. I once remore this error, in case it exists elte. Hongkong whether Mrs. Edy be a worthy, where, We never heard any suggestion before individual or otherwise; and as she seem to be
was to be considere held in lora sul coneration by her adherents, ' private, When people cul at a newspaper have we hope correspondente wil. not that we hir
to disen-s anything that my any needless hurting of thour feelings.—E1; bon p blish-d, it is assumal, in the abunce the f any request to the contrary, that DAILY PRESS "). Į journalist concerned is being talked to with a view to nether publication, Otherwise, why trouble him? fhese gentlemen were plainly and frankly informed at the first interview that ezeapt from a journalistic point of view, (our duty to our readers; the question at issue had no interes' for the individud with whom they discussed it.-Ed.]
TO THE ERING OF THE
SIR, You ought to point out how "in- geniously, not ingenuously" (to quote your own phrase) the Christian Since p-ople misquote professional men when it suits them. I have been shown a Christian Science article in which the American Paysician" (written by a New fork doctor was thus misquoted.
That disassa is cured by faith and prayer is so well attested that it would be foolhardy in ma to entradict.” In speaking of drugs as auxdiary to other healing forces he says, "They drus are not however, the sols or chief relister of the;
Every physiciau is aware physician. of the immense inflaeuc, the mind sways over the body, and wheu wiss he utilizes this to his own renown and the patient's good.”
"Dr. George J. Simpsou say,
Was
This is the point The American doctor was showing (obviously, I think; that the sonud root idea of "Christian Seleien) was a medical properly long before Christian Scienc heard of, that the interdependenc、 of mind and matter was and is recognised and acted upon by materialist doctors who regard mind as a ma. nifestat on of matter The suggestion of the misquotation is that Dr. Simpson was admitting the Christian Science claim that disease is cured by faith and prayer " alone -quile another thing. He probably spoke of drugs as 80 indispensable auxiliary. Yours truly.
Our correspondeut is not qatı fair io
BR a The not rius | referring to it
(2) For every fad that has ever arisen, it might be argued that "bundreds of thousands of people gladly testify." That proves nothing. Look at the deluded people who write in praise of quack panaceus.
when
ta
į
|
1
I
¦
TO THE EDITON OF THE
"DAILY PRESS,' }
Sie. -Are you not letting some of your correspondents get wide of the lol isang so ably defined by yourself at the outset of the prent agitation? Let us have something about actual local caseSE,
I have heard that a local "hester "c'aims to have cured a sick cat on the Peak, and that an application (as doubt jalari for the treatment of a Chins pony was refused on the ground that, being engaged in the mineral work of racing, the latter animal Can anyone tell us wasnt entitled to relief. ab ut this or other local activities of the new
CLEEK. healing art-Yours truly.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE
of
'DAILY PRESS.
tie
SIR,-In the schem⋅ of the pando “Chris- tian Science il w ud Rem as if the founde
With not mel had overlooked, or
■ deri
"The authority some autiqaily called Bible, ur the incongruity of naming it M D | Christian" woul. have beeɑa apparent, men
that it directly entraven & Christ's te cuing no “mi-quota ino." The it the relation of the mental and material. hiatus-dots show that only parts of the context expready affirms in His Sermon on the Mount. were given, and only inattentive readers would i that thou canst not make one hair black or be misle into thinking the writer s convert to white," and further ca
which of you taking It is almost impossible to
cabit to his stature ? Christian Scienc“.
thugui, câu a one save justtentive readers from themselves, bit
Perhaps it is following the French play in perhaps it would have been mor› spor smanlike which the sham doctor, to cover his mistake as to try. The qu tation seems u*. from
to the heart « position, explains, “Nas arous chan.. tout ca. The biblical amortion of Christian-Science standpunt, unfortunate, an
thobiny of the mind to alter fix-d osad. conveying (to att u ive realers is purport quite other than that it was pelaps fut sud-d to give tois of the body seems ouaciusire, that in to to the other kind. —Et]
say, if the person responsible for the oppositas elim hac no', in ber commanion with Deity which she articts she possesses, been fav.ared with later information. That is perhaps pos
Health Dear STR-You must be aware that a jour sible, as the organ of the in‹litutiva
and Scince has
gone through about 40 adicion nalist -sud especially that • presentative of
with additions and omissions, and, ne It t journalism, an Editor-can make most things
a Divine revelation, i appear ridiculous, and cao exsily deduce where, explicitly, claimed as deduction 13 AD advantage to his argumentop-on ap worlds of possibilities in that direction Such a line of attack may be perfectly sincere, and I believe that you adopted this course in all sincerity My object in mentinging this fact, is simply to point cat that your leading articl of this morning is a clevue piece of special ! pleasing, and no pro f that Christian Science is either illogical or absurd
(3) I attich no importance to the statement that 75 per cent of Christian Scientists claim to have been given up" by doctors, every human agency had been tried in raid." The evidence of such people needs to be [ro THE EDITOR OF supported by that of more trustworthy wit- Did any reputable doctor ever admit nesses. that a case given up by himself had sub. sequently been cared by Christian Science ? I would prefer an English doctor from the medical directory.
(4) If the lecturer does not want to make converts, why should be desire to " remore pre- valent misconceptions"? On the other hand, if be and bis colleagues think they bars got bold of a valuable truth, why do they at strive to make converts? They do hope to mike converts, and have been making them, according to what I have learned lately. Their journal, of which I have seen a copy, bide members to make converts.
1
1
i
THE DAILY TRESS,
It is difficult,
K
even for an Editor, to express thought in *crystalline terms of logic and with the clarity colloquially desiderated" by your cor.
་
4
By the way, your correspondent's suggestio a re sharing, if the Scientists con d work it up Why incomesfully, might bear practical fruit.
not
■ Christian Science Barber-shop, imma- terially material beards removed with imaginary mars, and payment made in similar cota ♬ The idea is allurine. Campbell Moore & Co. Ld. sbareholders might lake note of thir.— Yours sto..
C. V. LLOYD,
:
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.