CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 31 August 1920, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

JOY-KILLERS. (To the Bdltor.) Sir,—Your rorrespondent "Bystander," in hlft dofenco of the "Absolute drunkard," is hard up for an argument, and so ho falls back on tho flaying of a "witty divine/' He and the divine would have us believe that the "absolute drunkard" is a more desirable member of society than the "fanatical (what does fanatical mean?) temperance advocate." Now, they are, quite entitled to hold that opinion; but supposing the question were puti to the drunkards' wives up ahd down the 1 country, to those whose husbands do not figure lu the police cottrt reports, as well as those who are publicly convicted, and what would then be the verdict? Or, again, If the i question were put to the mass of bystanders in the country, even admitting the bystanders at -the liquor bars, I do not think the witty pair would have the majority of voices. No, Sir, though all the bystanders at all the hotel bars in New Zealand, with the aid of all til© wit oft all the witty divines, were to declare In favor of the drunkard, even then, the opinion of one sober man or woman would bfc of more value. "Bystander" and his witty divine may be witty, but they are not wise,— I am, etc., 4 G.a.M. KNOWLEDGE OF ALCOHOL. (To the Editor.) Sir,—Does "Bystander" mean to affirm that 1 convicted drunkenness is punished? iDoes that effect a cure? Does it affect those dependent : upon such ? There is the trouble; it does no j good in that direction. Will "Bystander" j placo Caesar against such men as Edison, who !is said to get results from application and j correct living? Caesar indulged in slavery, and ! his. cruelty was most abhorrent. Should liquor remain with us? There Is absolute necessity for teaching In schools a complele knbwiedge of alcohol. That work should be , undertaken by "Bystander," who probably : would so arrange matterß as to allow each ■ pupil to understand which particular intoxl- ! cant will not "knock him over" upon having j two or three drinks.—l am, etc., j THE "LIVING PRESENT." MEANING OF CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. (To the Editor.) Sir,—Having just received a copy of your paper of the 14th inst., in which is published a cabled report of the Lambeth Conference containing references to Christian Science, which are either incorrect or quite misleading, I shall be glad if lyou will grant me space for a correction. Although in the encyclical Christian Science is classed with spiritualism and theosophy. it has nothing in common with either, but is opposed to both, which fact is clearly set forth in the textbook ("Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures," by, M'ary Baker Eddy). . Since Christian Sc'ence recognises Cod as infinite Life, and as Spirit, and man its being' made in His "image and likeness," 'i teaches that man's life ts spiritual and uoi: Material. It agrees with rhe teaching of St. John that "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, Is not of the Father, but is of the world And the world passeth away and the lust thereof; but he that doeth tho will of God abidcth for ever." and' therefore It leads thought to the contemplation/ of those things that abide for ever, r This being so it cannot be rightly charged that the teachings of Christian Science are injurious to the spiritual life. It is the knowledge and demonstration of Christ as ever present that henls and saves mankind from both sickness and sin in Christian Science, and to Christian Scientists Christ Jesus Is the way-shower *nd example, so that in obeying His'lnjunction :o "heal the sick" as well as to "preach the gospel" they prove their "loyalty to Christ" in word and deed. Instead of having a "direct tendency to a pim-theistic doctrine," Christian Science leads directly awav from pantheism. According to Canon Liddon the pantheists', God "is literally everything; God is tho whole material and spiritual universe; He is humanity In all its manifestations," whereas Christian Science teaches that "God is Spirit." and that, "there Is no life, truth, intelligence nor substance in matter" (Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures, p. 468). if we accept as a premise that God is good, that He Is infinite, omnipotent and omnipresent, then a conclusion that disease and suffering are real would be to claim that they are part of! infinite good, and Christian Science is logical j In denying the reality of these evils. It I does not, however, deny that they seem real, j for Mrs. Eddy states that "sickness is neither! imaginary nor unreal—that is to the fright- \ ened, false sense of the patient. Sickness is! more than fancy; it is solid conviction. It is 1 therefore to be dealt with through right ap-; prehension of the truth of being." (Ibid, i p. 460). In Christian Science a clear distinction is tmrde between those things that are i God-created, spiritual, eternal, and perfect, and those things that appear real fo the physical senses, and failure to take cognisance of this distinction, so clearly set forth In the I authorised literature of the Christian Science 1 Church, Is the cause of the many mis-state-; ments and misunderstandings abnilt its teach-; ings. It is strange that, though it Is slated j that Christian Science is pantheistic, lrrecon-1 cllabie with the Scriptures, Injurious to spi-1 ritual life, and disloyal to Christ, yet it is claimed that "there is much in Christian 1 Science which ought to be found in the Church" Since Christian Science, as the name Implies, is the demonstrable knowledge of the Christ, of the Truth, its teachings are in conformity with the Bible, and shoyld, nat-1 urally, be found in any Church that calls itself Christ!an.~-I am, etc., MADGE BELL. (Christian Science Committee on Publication, N.I. of N.Z.) Auckland, August 2G, 1920.