Problems of Immanence: studies critical and constructiveWarschauer, Joseph
Religion
Problems of Immanence: studies critical and constructive
Warschauer, Joseph
Immanence of God
If you had a broken leg, would you send for a doctor?--Yes, to set it. I
have not sufficient understanding.
Continuing, witness said she did not believe in drugs, but she did in
food at present, because her understanding was not sufficient, as she was
only a student.
By a Juror: The reason Mrs. Dixon got worse was because of lack of
understanding on witness's part.
The Coroner: When she got worse, why did you not send for a doctor?--I
asked her if she wanted a doctor to tell me.
Yet she was getting worse owing to your lack of understanding?--I didn't
look at it in that light.
B. H., who attended Mrs. Dixon, said she was a trained nurse with nine
years' experience. Witness had, during the past two years, become a
Christian Scientist nurse. She was not a practitioner.
The Coroner: Has a practitioner any special qualifications?--No, a
practitioner is one who prays for another.
The Coroner: Would you give a patient a mustard poultice?--No.
But you would give her a hot-water bottle?--Yes.
Then where do you draw the line? You don't believe in material aid?--No,
I believe the other is better.
Do you believe in a judicious continuation of both?--No.
Did you give her beef tea?--Yes, as a nourishment.
But, nurse, you ought to know what every medical man knows, that beef tea
is a stimulant. Do you believe in stimulants?--Not at all.
{140}
Then why did you give her beef tea?--(After a pause) It was simpler to
get.
But it is contrary to your principles. Would you give _sal
volatile_?--No.
Witness explained that she called in no other help because she believed
prayer was the most effectual.
Why didn't you call in a doctor?--I think the patient should judge for
herself.
Even though her brain is clouded and she is dying?--Yes.
On another point the Coroner said: Did our Saviour use food and
stimulants?--He gave wine.
Why don't you give wine?--He did not give it in illness, but at a
marriage feast.
You want us to believe He gave wine to people who could do without and
withheld it from those who wanted it.
Asked a question as to calling in a doctor for surgery purposes, witness
said he would only be called in for setting bones and not for an
operation.
The Coroner: It amounts to this: you believe the Almighty is a bad
surgeon, but a good physician?--Our faith is not yet strong enough.
Dr. Cockell deposed that death was due to acute bronchitis.
Would she have recovered with medical attendance for a week before?--Yes.
The Coroner, in summing up, said there was no doubt Mrs. Dixon was
grossly neglected.
The jury returned a verdict of "Death from acute bronchitis, accelerated
by gross neglect by Mrs. D. and especially by Nurse H."
The Coroner: I am afraid that will mean manslaughter, which would be too
severe. Will you alter it, gentlemen? The jury then altered the verdict
to one of "severe censure on Mrs. D. and Miss H. for neglecting to obtain
medical aid."
[1] _The Grammar of Assent_, p. 201.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account