This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Christian Science article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
it feels EXTREMELY disingenuous and unbalanced to me that there isn't a section of this article specifically dedicated to the controversy and negative impacts of Christian Science -- the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Wikipedia page, for instance, has a whole "criticism and controversies" section, but Christian Science just gets passing mention in the overall summary of the past child cases, as if there aren't multiple continued, current documented Christian Science community deaths, illness outbreaks, etc, and extensive discussion of Christian Science as a cult by ex-members...this feels even more like an oversight when considering how detailed sections like the "prayer" part of the article are, or other detailed metaphysical explanations about the church's beliefs, with maybe interspersed nods to them being questionable. 72.249.242.210 (talk) 23:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to add this section if you have good sources and enough content; you can move much of the related content & sources from “healing” into your new section. Livin270 (talk) 14:23, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having a hard time grasping the relation of this article to our other Wikipedia articles. It's very similar to Church of Christ, Scientist. Both contain history, beliefs, and practices. The only real distinguishing feature I see is § Metaphysical family which provides some more context for the early development of Christian science beliefs and practices. So what's the difference in scope? Even if such a difference can be established, are our articles better for being split or would they be better merged?
This article is considerably biased towards the rhetoric that of the Church. It does not document the lack of formal medical training of Christian Science "nurses", nor does it document the numerous deaths resulting from parents not getting medical treatment for their children. This article is should in fact not even be a GA.— Your local Sink Cat (The Sink). 06:39, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a little mention under the section on CS theology of Eddy's similarity to Shakerism (which she may well have been softly influenced by in early life) but I feel it too closely implies a connection between Lee's version of a "Father-Mother God" with Eddy's. They are quite different theologies past the surface level, so the reference here seems pretty out of place. If nobody is opposed to me adding a little clarification in the section outlining a little further this point, I will. I would like to, in fact, make clear the distinction from Shakerism (which can be sourced pretty easily from Peel) since it seems a pressing enough misconception that it ought to be addressed, at least in brief. If it is too tangential for the article, however, I think the reference to Shakerism should be dropped entirely. As it lies, it is rather too vague and may lead to a misunderstanding, especially for the lay reader. Thanks all. ~2026-11646-24 (talk) 21:09, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
