Christian Science and Pantheism No. 1
CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS en masse repudiate the charge that Christian Science is a form of pantheism or is pantheistic. Now, the matter is not a problem of mere statement on either side. It is not enough merely to say that Christian Science is pantheistic; neither is it conclusive for Christian Scientists to deny merely and think that the matter is settled. The question is to be answered by the very facts themselves. The matter must be settled by a comparison of the principles involved. If there is a similarity in the principles of these two forms of teaching, then they are similar. If the two agree in their fundamental principles, then there is no evading the fact that Christian Science is pantheistic. “The radical principle of the [pantheistic] theory is that God and the world are one. It9denies to God any being distinct from the world, and to the world any being distinct from God. It may assume different forms according to the manner in which the divine nature is conceived. God may be conceived as spirit, . . . in [which] case there results an idealistic form of pantheism.”—“Apologetics,” by Alexander Dalmain Bruce, D.D., p. 71. The quotation given above was written without any reference to Christian Science. It is a plain definition of pantheism in its various forms; and we see at once, if we know anything about Christian Science, how truly the latter is pantheistic. Christian Science is a form of idealistic pantheism; it accounts God and the real world as one, and that spiritual; this is its fundamental doctrine; this is the root from which the whole growth springs. We will find very much in the book “Science and Health,” but consider this, taken almost at random from its pages: “God is the divine Principle of all that represents Him and of all that really exists.” Put this with the definition of pantheism as already given. “The radical principle of the [pantheistic] theory is that God and the world are one.” And the radical principle of the Christian Science theory is that God is the divine principle of all that really exists. “All is mind or God,” says Christian Science. “All is God,” says pantheism. Both come from the same root; the two grafts may differ in outward form to some extent, but there is such a kinship between the two that they both thrive from the very same root. And now according to the teachings both of Christian Science and of pantheism, since all is God, all is eternal; there was no creation. Pantheism teaches, “All things exist eternally by necessity.” Christian Science teaches that “harmonious and immortal man has existed forever.” “Spiritual man is the image or idea of God, an idea which can not be lost nor separated from its divine Principle.” “Immortal man is coexistent and coeternal with God.”—“Science and Health,” chapter on “Science of Being.” If man is coexistent with God, he has always existed with God, and was never subject to creation; for man there is no creation but coexistence with God. In this, pantheism and Christian Science are irrevocably in accord. Since Christian Science denies all spiritual existence or beings except the infinite Spirit—God, and since it denies the existence of the material universe, it denies creation as presented in the doctrines of Christianity, that is to say, in the Word of God. Again, take this definition as given in “Science and Health,” chapter “Science of Being”: “Man’s true consciousness is in the mental, not in any bodily or personal likeness to Spirit.” This places the matter of creation exactly where pantheism places it; there can not possibly be any creation. Since man’s consciousness and hence existence is in the mental, he is eternal, for God’s mind is eternal and unchangeable. Consequently man was never created; for if created there would be something more to man than purely mental. There would be the thought or mentality of the Creator plus its realization in time and space by the creative act. Hence Christian Science denies creation. It will not do to say that God created this mental, His thoughts, for that would necessarily imply that He had to do something before He could think, which is too absurd for consideration. Why, then, does Christian Science use the terms Creator and Creation?—For precisely the same reason that it uses “Christian” in its name of “Christian Science.” It uses throughout the names of Christianity for the prestige that such terms give, while in fact it teaches that which is absolutely unchristian. It appears in the sheep’s clothing of Christian terms, while it hides under this its real wolf nature of pantheism and idealistic philosophy. It denies in toto anything like creation, and yet uses the Christian term of Creator because of its beloved associations for hundreds of years in Christian doctrine.