You just don’t “understand” it well enough…

By far, the most common defence that Christian Scientists offer for the failures of their “system of healing” to live up to its lofty promises is some variation on the statement, “you just don’t have a [good enough/correct/complete] understanding of Christian Science.” This defence has popped up in the comments sections on this blog a few times, and I’ve seen it in reader reviews on Amazon.com of books that are critical of Christian Science, in particular the book God’s Perfect Child: Living and Dying in the Christian Science Church by Caroline Fraser. One reviewer comments, “Unfortunately Ms. Fraser does not have a thorough understanding of Christian Science and neither have most of the people who have reviewed the book, here or elsewhere.” (emphasis is mine) I happen to know that Fraser grew up in Christian Science, so I think she had a decent understanding of it, insofar as anyone can. I’ve also seen this defence numerous times in other public forums when people have criticized Christian Science and Christian Scientists have responded. I have also been told on more than a few occasions that I just didn’t/don’t understand it.

Knowledge is the goal

Real, genuine science, as opposed to Christian ‘Science’, is the quest for knowledge. This is knowledge gained through research, observation, verification, and duplication of results. The scientific method is a rigorous and well-accepted way to acquire and verify new knowledge that has its roots in the emergence of science itself in ancient Egypt and Greece, and evolved into its present form during the 17th and 18th centuries.¹

Grape Nuts

Over the years, I’ve occasionally heard the term “Grape Nuts” applied to Christian Science. This notion comes from the parallel drawn between the idea that, like the cereal that contains neither nuts nor grapes, Christian Science is neither “Christian” nor is it a “science”.