Abstract
A common criticism of Christian Science is that it is neither Christian nor scientific. American psychologist and philosopher William James would not, I believe, share this view, even though he does make critical comments about Christian Science’s orginator and her dogmatic followers. Following a suggestion of James, I distinguish two types of critical inquiry into Christian Science—outsider criticism and insider criticism—and show that the latter yields the better results. A pragmatic version of Christian Science can be offered that is distinct both from the myopic critics who malign it and from the dogmatic followers who recklessly adhere to it.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Eddy, M. B. (1875). Science and health, with a key to the scriptures. Boston: Trustees under the Will of Mary Baker Eddy.
Eddy, M. B. (1886/1925). Miscellaneous writings. In Prose works other than science and health. Boston: Trustees under the Will of Mary Baker Eddy.
Fraser, C. (1995). April Suffering children and the christian science church. In The atlantic monthly.
Gardner, M. (1993). The healing revelations of Mary Baker Eddy: The rise and fall of christian science. New York: Prometheus Books.
Greenspan, S. (2009) Annals of gullibility: Why we get duped and how to avoid it. Westport, CT.: Praeger Publishers.
James, W. (1902/1985). The varieties of religious experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
James, W. (2001). Correspondence (Vol. 1–12). Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
Peel, R. (1966). Mary Baker Eddy: The years of discovery. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ruetenik, T. The First Church of Christ, Pragmatist: Christian Science and Responsible Optimism. J Relig Health 51, 1397–1405 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-011-9508-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-011-9508-2