Church Policy & Medical Care

Does anyone know the year when the Mother Church began changing their language regarding medical care? Basically when they start started saying that CSers have a choice about whether or not they receive medical care.

This question popped up in one of the ExCS facebook groups and quite a discussion followed. In recent memory, there was the NYTimes piece, Christian Science Church Seeks Truce With Modern Medicine (March 23, 2010). There are the works of CS apologist Nancy Nilback Baxeter, namely Open the Doors of the Temple: The Survival of Christian Science in the Twenty-first Century, which argues, rather extensively, that Eddy did not wish for her followers to suffer, and that Eddy supported people seeking material means. We cite Baxter’s works extensively on our resource for “Helping Family Still in CS.”

Even in her own times, Eddy left loopholes and was quick to blame the injured party for their failure to properly demonstrate. She encouraged her followers to get vaccinated (Obey the Law), seek out doctors/obstetricians to assist during childbirth, and the ever popular “right use of temporary means” loop hope in Science and Health states:

If Christian Scientists ever fail to receive aid from other Scientists, – their brethren upon whom they may call, – God will still guide them into the right use of temporary and eternal means.  S&H p. 444:7-10

Which stands in contradiction to her earlier statement:

We cannot serve two masters nor perceive divine Science with the material senses. Drugs and hygiene cannot successfully usurp the place and power of the divine source of all health and perfection. S&H 167:12-14 S&H 167:12

Through out its existence, the Mother Church has walked a fine line between religious liberty and Christian Science as a therapeutic healing solution. Mother Church policy seems to fall on the side of “religious liberty” with any potentially lethal effects “lacking ill intent” (and/or understanding). Policy may pay lip service to the idea that CS have a “choice” about receiving medical care, however, as former-CS blogger Kindism notes in her post “nominal worshipers stay home“

If people choose to forgo medical treatment in favor of prayer or alternative healing methods that is their choice, but when the policy is institutionalized and a requirement for admittance [in CS facilities and institutions] it makes me angry. For many CS, taking the step of even considering going to a doctor is a huge one, and the added pressure of being ostracized from the community is often too much so they continue to pray and wait for healing.

There are Christian Science Nursing Care Facilities that make Principia’s policy about the “right use of temporary means” seem downright progressive. These groups are not directly affiliated with the Mother Church (2), they just require you are a member to be hired (3), are a Journal-listed CSP/Nurse, have had Class Instruction, have been/are currently an active church member, rely on CS for healing, etc.

Examples of institutionalized requirements are rampant among Christian Science nursing homes, which operate independently of the Mother Church. Numerous examples of this, and a 60 minutes interview with a former CS nurse can be found in our post on The “Healing Ministry” of Christian Science Nursing.

This site contains are numerous examples of CS forgoing medical care leading to unpleasant ends, including, Paul’s story “She was a true believer and wouldn’t have wanted it any other way” which tells of his mother’s untimely death to untreated skin cancer.

Then there is Jenny’s story “My eyesight was on the line!” where Principia administration followed her to the ER, and she reflects that “The crux of the issue for them was not my well-being or health or whether my eye problem was contagious, but whether I had been given a prescription.”

We also have stories like Marion’s, “Oh, don’t worry about it. Everybody does it” where she tells how she confessed to having a mastectomy and she “confided to another church member that I had broken the faith’s directives, and that I felt that I should resign my membership. This is the response that angers me still: a whispered response, ”Oh, don’t worry about it. Everybody does it.” Marion further reflects “I had been on the verge of risking my life. I believed these people were sincere and committed to what they professed. I should have known. Eddy was ‘committed’ until it became inconvenient for her. I may well have known about her dental work and morphine use even then, but still, the sense of betrayal was overpowering.”

So when did Official Policy shift? Official policy has always been Christian Science is never to blame, only those who practice it, and really, if they couldn’t do it properly, they should have known to go seek medical care.