The article “Health Care Issues at Prin” recommends that Christian Scientists pray to God for guidance, listen for “the still small voice,” and then be obedient to God’s direction when faced with a claim of disease that does not respond to C.S. treatment. The article is at odds with the widespread belief in the C.S. movement that if one just sticks with C.S., one will eventually get a healing.

I want to express my appreciation for Michael Booth’s article in the last issue of the Pilot. I feel that the issues addressed in this article reflect the feelings of many individuals of the community. For me, the greatest learning occurs when I encounter different thoughts.

Responding to the recent article regarding the practice of Christian Science and how it relates to the use of material medicine, one is reminded that the principles and practices outlined in Education at the Principia charge Principia with holding to the purest standard of Christian Science healing practice. With that charge in mind, let us ask those same questions implied or articulated in the aforementioned article, with the goal of eliminating any confusion regarding Christian Science and healthcare:

The article “Healthcare reform at Principia” published in the April 16, 2010 edition of the Pilot raised some very important subjects to any Christian Scientist. The author, as I understood the article, discussed two separate issues that often seem to collide: judgment of the choices made by Christian Scientists and the validity of medical treatment. I believe it is a mistake to combine these two issues. Mary Baker Eddy, the discoverer and founder of Christian Science, was very clear on how both of these topics ought to be handled, and as Christian Scientists, it makes sense that we should follow the advice of scripture and her counsel if we seek to advance in our understanding of Truth.