THE KING’S BUSINESS
498
Christian Science), although it is today problematic.” “ In Miscellaneous Writings, p. 288, the question is asked, ‘Is marriage nearer right than celibacy?’ The answer is given, ‘Human knowledge inculcates that it is, but Christian Science indicates that it is not.’ ” These statements show where Christian Science stands with regard to the quéstion o f marriage. It shows that in the mind o f the Christian Scientist celibacy, or the unmarried state, is" nearer right than the married state. -It is true that Christian Science does not openly forbid marriage, but whoever heard o f a marriage taking place in a Christian Science church, and performed by Christian Science readers or ministers?, Such facts as these ought to make those o f us who have the moral wel fare o f our nation at heart pause and think, if not shudder! Motherhood is not, according to Chris tian Science, the highest badge o f woman hood. In Miscellaneous Writings, p. 289, we have these words: “ Human nature has bestowed on a wife the right to become a. mother, but if the wife esteems not this a privilège . . . she may win a higher.” What is that higher? . . . to become a wife and not a mother? Thus motherhood is to be avoided; it is to be put in the category o f that which is below a woman’s highest and noblest function. This is the Christian Science idea of the marriage rela tion. May we be preserved from such a doctrine as this ! It reminds us o f the herësy foretold by the apostle concerning those who are led captive by silly women, and who forbid to marry.
istries o f love are changed into the acidities o f criticism and rebuke, silent, if not expressed. More than that, not a few homes have been broken up by Christian Science. “ The sacred institution of marriage is the foundation o f home, but I am informed by one who for several years was in the inner circle o f the Christian Science movement that marriage is not now encouraged among those in the highest positions.* He .tells o f two young people who lost caste because they dared to marry” (A . C. Dixon). “A man or woman . . having accepted the claims o f the marriage covenant, is held in Christian Science as morally bound to fulfill all the claims growing out o f this contract, unless such claims are relin quished by mutual consent o f both parties, or this contract is legally dissolved” ( Misc. Writings, p. 297, 1883-1896. 1. Christian Science virtually Denies the Need and Dignity o f Marriage and Motherhood. “ Did God at first create (one) man unaided—that is, Adam—but afterwards require the union o f the two sexes in order to create the rest of the human family? N o !” (S. & H., p. S24, 1899; pp. 531, 532, 1909, 1916). “ Generation does not rest on sexual basis at all” (Generation rests on no sexual basis, p. 274, 1899). God is the Father o f all (p. 64, 1916), according to Christian Science. “ To abolish marriage at this period and maintain morality and generation would put ingenuity to ludicrous shifts; yet this is possible in Science, (meaning, o f course,'
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs