For a similar reason the patient who has had “many operations” is usually one whose (nervous) sufferings are so manifold and so various that physicians are driven to seek relief by one measure after another, and finally by a variety of surgical procedures.
It is a striking fact that, as one listens to the recital of Christian Science “cures,” one hears little or nothing of the great common organic diseases, such as arterio-sclerosis, phthisis, appendicitis—and still less of the common acute diseases, such as pneumonia, malaria, apoplexy. Chronic nervous (that is, mental) disease is the Christian Scientist’s stock in trade.
Similarity of Christian Science Testimony
No one can study the printed records of Christian Science cures without noting a remarkable similarity running through many hundreds of them, a similarity in style, in phraseology, and in the general structure of the letters.
For example, Mrs. Eddy’s name was mentioned within five lines of the end in fifty-six out of seventy-five letters which I have recently examined. I have excluded here all cases in which Mrs. Eddy’s name was mentioned earlier in the letter. It seems hardly likely that all these writers would spontaneously bring in the name of their leader precisely in this position in the letter.
In twelve out of seventy-five letters the rather unusual phrase materia medica occurs.
The price of treatment under Christian Science and under the previous medical care is mentioned in a large proportion of these letters.
Not one of these letters mentions the name of any doctor connected at any time with the case. From personal experience with similar stories heard from my own patients and from the lips of Christian Scientists, I know that doctors’ names are usually mentioned. It seems unlikely that in one hundred consecutive testimonies the physicians’ names should have been spontaneously omitted.
For these reasons one cannot help believing either that these letters have been liberally edited, or that their writers have been much influenced by reading or hearing of similar cases. This does not necessarily imply any charge of intentional deception, but weakens very considerably their value as evidence.