Christian Science. Putting these two words together is difficult for some to accept. After all, religion and science are considered two separate and distinct fields of study, and many feel there exists a significant gulf between them.
This and other questions related to Christian Science were often discussed when I shared a small business with a close friend. He felt these two immense and seemingly unrelated words were never meant to go together. We had many deep conversations on the subject.
I explained that the science behind Christian Science was best illustrated through the practical proof of spiritual healing. I pointed out that Jesus healed countless individuals using prayer alone, and that he taught and encouraged others to do the same. By doing so, Jesus signified that these actions were not miracles, but the application of spiritual principles or laws. I told my friend that Christian Science was the rediscovery of Jesus’ healing method. And like the laws of gravity, aerodynamics or mathematics, it was and is available for anyone to learn, practice and prove for themselves. However, this Christianly scientific method is only successful when coupled with the Christian qualities as taught by Jesus–such as humility, tenderness and love. In this way, the healing of disease and illness of all kinds have been accomplished.
This explanation made little impression on my friend. He didn’t believe in God and the idea of Christian character seemed to have nothing to do with science. To him, only the scientific method could determine if something was scientifically authentic.
A partial definition of “the scientific method” from Wikipedia states:
“… To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation the formulation and testing of hypotheses.”
I reiterated to my friend that the science behind prayer-based healing, as taught in Christian Science, can best be proven by individual demonstration. I shared examples in my own life and invited him to visit a Christian Science Reading Room and read a few of the corroborated accounts of healing on record (many of them medically diagnosed).
My friend always respected my devotion, but responded that, to him, Christian Scientists testifying to the benefits attributed to their faith would always be biased and therefore suspect. It didn’t seem to matter to him that these testimonies were an unparalleled historical record of over 80,000 accounts from around the world, testifying to the efficacy of a healing system that has continued for over 125 years. My friend thought that unless he could see evidence of a third party to test the science, he did not feel impelled to investigate it further. And there we often left it.
So last summer, I thought of my friend and business partner when I found a blog by an ordained interfaith minister named Rev. Mary Jo Leaper. Rev. Leaper’s blog post of June 9, 2010 is titled, “A Christian Science Healing.” In it, she shares how she purchased the Christian Science textbook, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, by Mary Baker Eddy. She read it from cover to cover and even memorized a number of passages. Later, she found herself overhearing of someone’s physical problem and felt impelled to pray for this person as she had learned from the textbook. The next day, she found that the person was completely healed. Rev. Leaper attributes the healing to the scientific prayer she learned and applied from Science and Health. She is not a Christian Scientist, but found that she could apply what she learned in Christian Science to heal others.
Questioning the validity of prayer-based healing is nothing new. Jesus faced it in his time, as did Eddy in the nineteenth century. Going back to my friend–one thing we would likely agree on is that results matter. I’m reminded of the time when Jesus healed the man who had been born blind. The Pharisees refused to accept that the healing was attributed to Jesus and urged the man to deny the efficacy of Jesus’ prayer. The man responded,
“I know nothing about that one way or the other. But I know one thing for sure: I was blind . . . I now see.” (John 9: 25, The Message)
Bill,
Just found your site and signed up for your posts. You are right on the money about the importance of remembering the connection of Science and Christianity. Either one without the other is like half a pair of scissors.
I would like to invite you to check out my blog on the Bible: http://www.TheBibleSpeakstoYou.com
Hi James:
I’m glad you found me! I would have responded sooner, but your comment was in my spam folder. I’m so glad I found it. I appreciate your comment and invitation to visit your blog. It’s wonderful. I especially appreciate your warm welcome page. I’m now one of your new subscribers and look forward to reading your posts. Regarding your current one, I also studied in Europe in college and visited Cezanne’s mountain during my travels. Such a beautiful area!
I recently read a book (written as fiction) about Jesus’ maturation into the healer that he became. Even before reading it , it has always struck me that he said: Follow me. To me it is clear he meant “do the same”. I am liking your blog. I plan to follow it even I do not comment much.
Hi Nina, Great comment! Thank you so much for taking the time to leave a message. I’m grateful to know that I have some regular readers out there! – Bill
Great explanation of the “science” part of Christian Science. Also nice to know Christian Science works for people of other faiths.
Thanks Bob, great to hear from you!
Great post, very interesting.
Thanks Brooke!
Okay. So what if…
…a person witnesses or experiences a physical healing that can’t be explained by medical science, and wonders how it happened, what caused the healing – would that be considered a kind of scientific inquiry?
And let’s say the person comes up with an hypothesis that the healing came about from something mental, rather than physical.
And the person tests this hypothesis – finds herself sick, and tries to heal herself by changing her thoughts, rather than applying some physical intervention to rid herself of the sickness.
And then let’s say that she’s healed.
And let’s say, hypothetically, that she continues to experience this same kind of thing again and again in her life – so much so that she gets to a place where she can predict pretty accurately the results of using this method for healing.
Let’s say that other people are doing the same kind of thing in their own lives – and that they’re applying what they’re learning in their own experience to heal other people – complete strangers, let’s say…
Some of these healings happen to be diagnosed by medical scientists first, and then, afterward, when the healings take place, the medical scientists confirm them. Some of these healings are then actually published in a journal (*The Christian Science Sentinel* and *The Christian Science Journal*). Would this kind of study be considered scientific?
Another poster was talking on another forum about research a colleague of hers had done on the placebo effect. I am really curious to find out more about this now. I mean – wouldn’t it be a radical, amazing, revolutionary thing if scientists found that they didn’t need to rely on pharmaceuticals at all to help heal people?!! Think what this would do to our economy! Think what this would do to the big pharmaceutical companies!! Ooh – wouldn’t that make a great plot for an action-adventure type novel?!: Some rogue doctor finds that we can completely by-pass the pharmaceutical companies to get healing – we don’t need their product anymore – we can all heal ourselves just by changing our own thoughts – and the pharmceutical bigwigs get wind of this, and they go after the rogue doctor… and… well, there’d have to be a lot of car chases and hovering helicopters and homing devices and listening devices and technology being used by the bad guys to hunt down our hero before he tells the world about his discovery, and… of course, it’d have a happy ending.
Karen, I just finished an adventure novel that came somewhat close to what you describe. I may do a book review on it soon. Enjoyed your hypothetical scenario. Thanks for sharing it!
Hello, Mr. Scott. I’m hoping to better understand the science of Christian Science, and your post seems like a great opportunity to ask some pretty fundamental questions on the topic. I’d be grateful for your assistance in addressing questions such as:
1.) How can a reasonable person evaluate the claim that Christian Science is scientific? You included a description of the scientific method in your post, but it seems like your article doesn’t give much support for Christian Science adhering to most aspects of that method. What resources are available to someone who is looking for a rigorous scientific explanation and defense of Christian Science’s claims?
2.) What measurable, observable data are evaluated by Christian Science? You mention the 80,000 testimonies as if that represents scientific data, but what aspects of those testimonies are measurable? How is confirmation bias avoided? Are any other data considered? Are there any data from controlled conditions which are designed to isolate the variables?
3.) What actual experimentation could be done to evaluate Christian Science? You wrote that the science is best illustrated “through the practical proof of spiritual healing”, and “by individual demonstration”. How, precisely, is that done? If I attempt such demonstrations and fail, how do you determine whether that disproves Christian Science or else whether I’m doing it wrong? Note that your disclaimer (“… this Christianly scientific method is only successful when coupled with the Christian qualities as taught by Jesus”) sounds like a potentially unmeasurable post hoc rationalization of experimental results. Besides humility, tenderness, and love, what other qualities are required? Is there any way to observe and measure whether one’s qualities are sufficient?
4.) What actual hypotheses are proposed by Christian Science? You wrote that Jesus’s actions were the “application of spiritual principles or laws”. What precisely are these principles? Can spiritual laws be expressed by simple expressions or equations like physical laws (e.g. Gravity), or is there some fundamental difference?
5.) Are there any observations which could, in theory, falsify Christian Science?
Thank you for your time. I’d be happy to clarify or followup on any aspect of this post.
Dear R2-D2: I appreciate your interest in gaining a better understanding of the science of Christian Science. I look forward to responding to your questions soon. I may even post my response on the blog. In the meantime, thanks for writing and I hope you enjoy the Thanksgiving holiday!