EDITOR'S TABLE. 



271 



top of her house distrusting the testi- 

 mony of her eyes that it was a long way 

 to the ground ; she would not eat food 

 which her sense of taste told her was 

 unfit to eat; nor remain on a railroad- 

 track when her hearing told her that a 

 train was coming. It is absurdly illogi- 

 cal to trust the senses in such cases, and 

 to refuse to trust them in the precisely 

 parallel cases when they testify to a 

 headache, or the inflammation of a joint, 

 or the presence of a malignant tumor. 

 Our senses arc occasionally deceived by 

 close resemblances, but with these ex- 

 ceptions the experience of every day of 

 our lives embraces a countless host of 

 instances in which we find it safe to 

 trust our senses. All the observations 

 which furnish the material of science 

 are made by the senses, and any doc- 

 trine which denies the trustworthiness 

 of the senses certainly is not science, 

 whatever else it may be. " Christian 

 science" makes itself ridiculous by strut- 

 ting about in the borrowed plumage of 

 a system whose data and method it 

 affects to despise. The application of 

 the name of science to this vague meta- 

 physical doctrine is utterly unwarranted. 

 In trade, art, politics, religion, and every 

 other field in which wealth or fame can 

 be achieved, spurious articles are being 

 palmed off continually under the name 

 of something else which enjoys a well- 

 earned repute. Especially has there 

 been of late years an eagerness to tack 

 the name of science on to all sorts of 

 schemes and theories which have no 

 particle of right to the designation, in 

 order that they may share its glory and 

 gain the aid of its prestige. 



Mr. Bailey claims that " Christian 

 science " has been vindicated by numer- 

 ous successes in healing disease. Many 

 persons with various complaints have 

 been subjected to " Christian science " 

 treatment and have ceased to complain. 

 From this he infers not only that the 

 treatment cured them, but also that all 

 these grotesque notions about "the im- 

 pressions of spirit" and the falsity of 



the senses must be true. As was shown 

 by the contributor to our April number, 

 it is not necessary to accept the " Chris- 

 tian science " theory in order to explain 

 the process of mental healing. When 

 there is any real effect, it is due to the 

 stimulating influence exerted upon the 

 patient's mind, and it makes no differ- 

 ence whether the stimulus is truth or 

 error, if the patient only is stirred up by 

 it. The alleged results of "Christian 

 science," and the number of its believ- 

 ers, have been paralleled by many delu- 

 sions which have had their day and then 

 disappeared. Mesmer was a greater 

 prophet in his time than Mrs. Eddy. 

 Mesmerism had its host of cured pa- 

 tients, many of them very worthy per- 

 sons, who gave enthusiastic testimonials 

 to its efficiency and truth. Spiritualistic 

 healers have paraded their alleged cures, 

 and have argued for their doctrine as 

 persistently as the " Christian scientists," 

 but they have never gained any scientific 

 standing. Every other absurd quackery 

 that bids for the dollars and homage of 

 the ignorant multitude has the same sort 

 of indorsements, but time and science 

 deal mercilessly with all alike. Witch- 

 craft and diabolic agency have been 

 wide-spread and eminently reputable 

 doctrines, but they have ignominiously 

 fallen beneath the attacks of scientific 

 investigators. The reader will find in 

 a note to Dr. White's article in our 

 present issue some of the leading au- 

 thorities which have combated these 

 myth - making and wonder - mongering 

 agencies. A comparison of one of these 

 books with "Science and Health" will 

 show the difference between a scien- 

 tific and a visionary treatment of a sub- 

 ject. Mrs. Eddy's book, as shown in 

 the extracts which Mr. Bailey gives, 

 is an incomprehensible, because mean- 

 ingless, mass of rant and rubbish, con- 

 sisting of capricious inferences from 

 scanty facts, of far-fetched analogies, 

 of hysterical appeals to sentiment, and 

 fanciful twisting of language. The fact 

 that such a baseless speculation as 



