« Some More Trivia Questions | Main | The "continuing to eat the pie" accounts »

07/29/2010

Comments

Calvin A. Frye

Thank you for the post. It helps to clarify.

Craig Beardsley

Despite the high profile of this controversial subject matter it is striking that never before has an analysis of this issue been published or discussed in a public forum (to the best of my knowledge). The notion discussed (checks and balances) has been rife for nearly a century, and yet no church-issued statement discussing the subject has been circulated (to the best of my knowledge); no journalist, scholar, historian, editor, or blogist--until now--has addressed it. It would seem the church's legal department, perhaps, or the office of Committee on Publication would have addressed it in the same way that the issue of the permanence of the Mother Church was. While factions will always exist and viewpoints differ, it is axiomatic that unbiased, truth-seeking, and studious effort be made to minimize notion and belief. Only then will a more fully-realized understanding of events allow "Christian Science and Christian Scientists (to) have a history..." as they "will" and "must" (italicized emphasis to be added) (Miscellaneous Writings 106: 3-4.) Where professional writers have neglected an important piece of history--and having access to letters of John Dittemore and Septimus Hanna are certainly useful instruments to this post, perhaps not available to such professionals--an amateur has performed an invaluable service. Kudos, Keith.

The comments to this entry are closed.