Article: Christian Science

Christian Science is a teaching regarding the efficacy of spiritual healing according to the interpretation of the Bible by Mary Baker Eddy, in her book Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures (Eddy, 1934). Students of Christian Science are usually, though not always or necessarily, members of the Church of Christ, Scientist.

Overview

Christian Science is a teaching that does not use conventional medicine but holds that the ills of the flesh, including death itself, can be healed by prayer alone. This belief extends to the possibility of correcting any kind of wrong-doing, or "sin" (indeed the latter is more important than physical healing in Christian Science belief). Christian Scientists see sin, disease, and death as derived from a sense of separation from God. At the core of Christian Science is the teaching that God and His/Her creation are wholly good, and totally spiritual, and that God has made all things in His image and likeness, (i.e. spiritually flawless). Thus, the actual reality of our being and all existence is spiritual, not material. Christian Scientists would see this spiritual reality as the antithesis of the material reality we seem to be experiencing. Yet, Christian Science does acknowledge and address that we all appear to be experiencing a material existence, but sees it as something to be put off, or replaced by a spiritual understanding of God and creation. This is where healing through prayer comes in. (Eddy, 1934 [1906]: pp. 1-17.)

Prayer, from the Christian Science perspective, is not asking God to intervene in human affairs, but rather involves the attempt to learn more of God's spiritual reality. This "awakens mortal thought", by degrees, to the spiritual nature of things. Christian Scientists claim the effect of this spiritualizing of thought is healing, -- physical, emotional, or otherwise. Consequently, healing (and health care) is attempted not through physical manipulation of patients' bodies through drugs, surgery, or otherwise, but rather through "Christian Science treatment", a specific form of prayer intended to spiritualize thought with respect to the patient's illness. (Eddy, 1934 [1906], pp. 1-17).

There is no formal compulsion on Christian Scientists either to use Christian Science healing or to eschew medical means. (Eddy, pp.443:1--444:30) They avoid using the two systems simultaneously, however, in the belief that they tend to counteract or contradict each other, since they are working from opposite basises: the material, the basis that something is physically broken and needs to be fixed, and the spiritual, the basis that the Spirit is already harmonious and perfect and that a false-belief (to the contrary) needs correcting. (Some Christian Scientists may feel compelled by internal and external cultural influences to avoid medical (material) healing systems.

The claims of Christian Science to be able to heal are documented in issues of the Christian Science Journal and the Christian Science Sentinel, sometimes supported by confirming observations of medical practitioners who were involved in a case prior to Christian Science being applied.

Mary Baker Eddy discovered this method of healing when she was healed of an injury in 1866 after rereading a passage of one of Jesus' healings. She felt that the method of healing must have been that used by Christ Jesus to heal all the cases documented in the New Testament. The Bible does not explicitly state the exact method Jesus used (though there is a strong hint in Mark 11: 23). However, a deep study of the Bible over many years coupled with Mary Baker Eddy's application of what she was gleaning from her study to actual and varied cases of illness in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, brought her to the point where she felt impelled to document her findings and teach her discovery to those who were interested. The primary source for learning Christian Science is the textbook Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy.

Mary Baker Eddy defined Christian Science as follows: "...divine Science, which, reduced to human apprehension, she has named Christian Science." (Eddy, 1934, p.471.)

The tenets of Christian Science

1. We acknowledge and adore one supreme and infinite God. We acknowledge His Son, one Christ; the Holy Ghost or divine Comforter; and man in God's image and likeness.

2. We acknowledge God's forgiveness of sin in the destruction of sin and the spiritual understanding that casts out evil as unreal. But the belief in sin is punished so long as the belief lasts.

3. We acknowledge Jesus' atonement as the evidence of divine, efficacious Love, unfolding man's unity with God through Christ Jesus the Way-shower; and we acknowledge that man is saved through Christ, through Truth, Life, and Love as demonstrated by the Galilean Prophet in healing the sick, and overcoming sin and death.

4. We acknowledge that the crucifixion of Jesus and his resurrection served to uplift faith to understand eternal Life, even the allness of Soul, Spirit, and the nothingness of matter.

5. And we solemnly promise to watch, and pray for that Mind to be in us which was also in Christ Jesus; to do unto others as we would have them do unto us; and to be merciful, just, and pure.

• (Eddy, 1934 [1906]: p.496).

Key points in Christian Science Healing

The basis of Christian Science healing is the view that "man" (i.e. the male/female spiritual being who appears as individual human beings) is the reflection or expression of a wholly good and perfect God, and therefore is perfect him/herself. Christian Scientists believe that God loves each and every individual, because God is the Creator of all.

Another important point in Christian Science is that sickness is the result of either fear, ignorance, or sin. Therefore, when the erroneous cause is corrected, the false sense of discord will disappear. The basis by which to eliminate the false cause is to fill thought with its opposite (true causation, or God). So, replacing fear with trust in an all-good God; replacing ignorance with the understanding of man's real relation to God as the perfect and loved child of God; and ceasing to sin or cherish a sinful sense in one's thought, will bring about healing. Suffering can occur only whilst one believes in the supposed reality of a problem; if one changes one's belief to a different point of view, then a different phenomenon is observed. The (conscious or unconscious) belief that sickness is real or has power is what seems to make one sick, but to understand that sickness is not real, and that it cannot have any power because God is the only power, eliminates the seeming sickness.

Christian Scientists regard the material world as a kind of consensual illusion which is due to a misperception of the true, spiritual world. Such a misperception can, they believe, be re-adjusted by the re-orientation of thought, or prayer in Christian Science terms, whereby the illusion can be, at least partially, dispelled. The result is healing. Eventually, the spiritual realm will appear in its true glory as indicated in Chapter 21 of the Book of Revelation.

Christian Science Prayer

Christian Science teaches that prayer is a spiritualization of thought or an understanding of God and of the nature of the underlying spiritual creation. Adherents believe that this can result in healing, by bringing spiritual reality (the "Kingdom of Heaven" in Biblical terms) into clearer focus in the human scene. The world as it appears to the senses is regarded as a distorted version of the world of spiritual ideas: the latter is the only true reality. Prayer can heal the distortion. The analogy might be made with tuning a musical instrument that is out of key, cleaning a window that has become clouded over, or bringing a lens into focus. Christian Scientists believe that prayer does not change the spiritual creation but gives a clearer view of it, and the result appears in the human scene as healing: the human picture adjusts to coincide more nearly with the divine reality.

Prayer works through love: the recognition of God's creation as spiritual, intact and inherently lovable. Christian Scientists consider that this is the way Christ Jesus healed. Their aim is to reinstate the element of healing which, they believe, was lost with early Christianity. They cite such Bible texts as Mark 11: 22-24 and Mark 16: 17-18 in support of their contention that Christian faith demands demonstration in healing. (According to Christian Science there are not two creations, a spiritual and a material, but only one spiritual creation which is incorrectly perceived as material--in biblical terms we "see through a glass darkly".) The more faith a person has in God, the less faith they will have in any other supposed power and the more likely they are to be able to heal, according to this teaching.

An important point in Christian Science is that the healing of sin is more important than the healing of physical disease, and that prayer and the moral regeneration of one's life go hand-in-hand. (Christian Science teaches that while disease may be a result of sin or wrong-doing it is not necessarily so--it may equally be the result of fear, or ignorance of God's power and goodness.) The chapter on "Prayer" in the Christian Science textbook, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy, gives a full account of healing through prayer, while the testimonies at the end of the book are written by people healed through spiritual understanding. Christian Scientists claim no monopoly on the application of God's healing power through prayer, and welcome it wherever it occurs.

Christian Science and Evil

There are two major kinds of phenomena described as "evil": natural evil (e.g. disease etc.) and moral evil (murder etc.)

The Christian Science position on the nature of evil can be elaborated as follows.

A person who deliberately or negligently inflicted disease on another would be condemned by human opinion. Since God must be at least as good as we are, it follows that He neither creates disease nor allows it to exist.

We are commanded to love one another, yet it would surely be wrong to love evil. If there are some evil people, it would be wrong to love those people (or at least to include their evil in our love). We cannot forgive someone without mentally detaching the evil that they do, from the person him/her self. Consequently forgiveness is impossible if we believe that moral evil is a real part of a person.

A person who chooses to do evil does it out of a false sense of good. Even the worst criminal perpetrates his/her acts in the (false) belief that some good might thereby accrue to the perpetrator: e.g. security, fulfillment, happiness etc. These are good qualities, not evil ones. Moral evil, even at its worst, is a false sense of good: it is a mistake.

Human law forbids persons to cause unnecessary suffering, to use torture, or to punish people for the crimes of others. Consequently a God who would do such things would be worse than the humans He created.

If there is an evil power in the universe, and that power has (say) 40% of all the power there is, then God can have only 60%. Consequently God would not be omnipotent. The same problem would arise if evil were said to have any power at all, no matter how minute. If God is omnipotent, evil does not exist.

Christianity is incompatible with a belief in the reality of evil.

Does God punish evildoers? The illusion of evil punishes itself. As long as a person continues to act in an evil way, cherishes any propensity to do so, or fails to forgive others or themselves, suffering will result in this life and in the life to come.

Christian Science and Matter

Some traditional objections to the notion of a material world, or at least to the belief that we can know anything about it, are as follows.

We don't need the term "matter" to describe anything in the world.

Illusions and hallucinations often occur. If the majority of people had the same illusion, would that be more real than what the remainder believed? If not, why not?

Sense-data impinge on our conscious awareness. But no-one knows how to get beyond the sense-data to something that might cause them.

Words only have meaning in terms of other words. We cannot get beyond words to whatever lies beyond them.

The Christian Science viewpoint goes something as follows. The question might be asked as to what we love about those closest to us (e.g. a parent, child etc.) It is presumably nothing physical or material, since--presumably--we would love those individuals just as much if their physical attributes were different, or they lost them through age or accident. What we value about those close to us are intangible (Christian Science would say spiritual) qualities such as love, faithfulness, innocence, protection etc. In Christian Science terms these are the “real”, timeless, transcendent qualities that constitute our spiritual being. They cannot be perceived materially but only through an inward feeling or response. In an ultimate sense terms like “love”, “holiness” “harmony” etc. suggest the being of God, in Whom the spiritual creation is embraced.

Christian Science and Philosophy

Christian Science might be considered as a form of theistic monistic idealism: there is but one substance which is God and in Whom we are all embraced in love. In comparison with other systems Christian Science is probably closest to Neoplatonism, though it does not teach a doctrine of emanation and it believes that the spiritualization of consciousness can (and should) have a practical effect in physical healing, as well as in moral regeneration. Philosophically, Christian Science is closer to the Platonic and neo-Platonic elements that influenced Christian theology in previous eras than to the Aristotelianism that prevailed in mainstream Christian thought. Christian Science also seems to have some resonance with the thought of Parmenides insofar as the latter can be interpreted in the contemporary world.

Christian Science shares with George Berkeley a belief in the unreality of matter, but it rejects matter not just as a superfluous term or concept--for Christian Science, what we call the material world is a kind of hallucinatory distortion of the underlying spiritual reality, a distortion that can be healed through prayer. Christian Science, like e.g. Buddhism believes in the illusory nature of the world of the senses, but unlike Buddhism it does not believe that ageing and death are inevitable: they can be overcome through the overcoming of sin. Consequently immortality--in the literal sense--is possible. (Other crucial distinctions from Buddhism include the fact that Christian Science affirms the existence of God, the central role of Christ Jesus, and spiritual individuality.)

Christian Science was elaborated by a female thinker--Mary Baker Eddy--who rejected the "coldness" of traditional philosophy and emphasized the importance of love (in the sense of agape) as well as abstract thought, and indeed the desirability of the integration of the two. ("Have a cell less in the brain and a fibre more in the heart" in her words.) It is not enough to think true thoughts: our consciousness must be imbued with love. Furthermore, that love must be lived as well as felt.

Christian Science and Science

Christian Scientists differ from biblical literalists: they regard the Bible as having, in part, symbolic rather than literal meaning. Consequently they do not believe that the Theory of Evolution is necessarily false from a human perspective, nor do they object to its being taught in schools. They regard the Theory of Evolution, even if true, as referring to the illusory, mortal realm rather than to the realm of spiritual perfection. For similar reasons, Christian Science does not clash with contemporary geology, cosmology, or biology and indeed Christian Scientists argue that their teachings--specifically in regard to the role of consciousness in the creation of material "reality"--may throw some light on the perplexing paradoxes of quantum mechanics, with particular reference to the Copenhagen Interpretation. (See also Consciousness causes collapse). Also, the Christian Science teaching regarding the fundamentally mental nature of the human world may help to explain some phenomena of parapsychology--telepathy, precognition, morphic resonance, etc.

However, even if a change of thought seems to have the desired result in healing, there is no obvious means of connecting the result with the supposed cause: Christian Science healings are sometimes dismissed as anecdotal. According to the influential teachings of Karl Popper a scientific theory should be falsifiable. There is no obvious way to set up an experiment whereby the claims of Christian Science could be falsified, and consequently their claim to scientificity is open to question. (From the much looser perspective of the philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend, Christian Science might have a claim to scientificity.)

Furthermore, if Christian Science is true and the material world is the manifestation of human thought, the issue of scientific objectivity becomes clouded: the thoughts and expectations of the scientific observers would--if they are unbelievers--presumably have a negative effect on the experiment.

These problems display the difficulty of scientifically assessing the claims of Christian Science. Consequently, the claim of Christian Science to the title "Science" is problematic, except in the much looser sense of "science" as "knowing" (Latin "scio".)

The claim of Christian Science to be a persuasive metaphysical system or overall world-view seems more sustainable than its claim to be a science--the requirements for a persuasive metaphysical system are those of coherence, succinctness, non-contradiction, comprehensiveness, intuitive appeal, explanatory power etc. rather than susceptibility to experimental testing.

Christian Science and Theology

In terms of Christian theology, Christian Science bears some similarity to the teachings of e.g. Meister Eckhart. However, it rejects the attribute of mysticism to its teachings, and should not be confused with pantheism.

Christian Science avoids the theological problem of evil by its teaching of the unreality or nothingness of evil. However, it does not address the problem of where the illusion of evil came from--beyond the position that, since it is nothing, it came from nowhere. (Asking the question, for Christian Scientists, is like a mathematician spending his/her time trying to work out where the illusion that 2+2=5 came from--a waste of time that gets one nowhere and indeed postpones the solution of the problem.) If one changes the basis of thought from a belief in evil to an understanding of the universality of good, Christian Scientists believe, one's experience will adjust accordingly. Eventually the question "where does evil come from" will simply disappear with the negative phenomena that occasioned it.

Christian Science differs from conventional theology since it regards God as both Father and Mother. This does not refer to any anthropomorphic, quasi-physical characteristics, but simply to the teaching that God is characterised by qualities traditionally considered feminine (gentleness, compassion, nurturing etc.) as well as by those traditionally considered masculine (strength, principle, protection etc.) Each one of us, as God's image or reflection, embodies those qualities as well, in our essential being.

Christian Science distinguishes between Jesus the man and the Christ or divine manifestation. In considering the question of the relationship between divinity and humanity in reference to Christ Jesus, it is important to consider the Christian Science definition of God as "The great I AM."

While some Christian Science teachings are unorthodox from the point of view of conventional theology (e.g. the rejection of substitutionary atonement, and of the concept of Hell as a place of eternal punishment), others are orthodox (e.g. the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection of Jesus).

While Christian Scientists revere Mary Baker Eddy as the discoverer and founder of Christian Science, they do not regard her as having added anything to essential Christianity but simply as having elaborated its essence and consequences. (A comparison might be made of the status of Thomas Aquinas for Catholics, Martin Luther for Lutherans, or John Calvin for Calvinists.)

Christian Science and Medicine

While Christian Scientists respect the work of medical practitioners, they prefer not to use medical means and Christian Science treatment at the same time, in the belief that the two would simply counteract each other. Christian Scientists who choose to rely on medical treatment for a specific problem normally give up Christian Science treatment for that period. The Christian Science Church does not forbid the use of medical means by its members, nor does it exert informal pressure on them to eschew material medicine. (Indeed, Mary Baker Eddy on occasion had recourse to pain-killers for pain that was not being met through Christian Science prayer.)

However, Christian Scientists, like Mary Baker Eddy herself, display more resistance to the use of drugs than to surgery. Why this is so is not entirely clear, and may involve one or more reasons: the perceived poisonous elements of some drugs; their side-effects; the relative difficulty of "mental surgery", etc.

While there is no formal prohibition of the use of medical means by Christian Scientists, some individual members may well resist doing so, in the belief that it would be evidence of a failure to "demonstrate" Christian Science healing.

In contrast to conventional medicine, Christian Science healing is not reliant on animal testing, nor does it involve massive state expenditure on health care, or the risk of "iatrogenic" (physician- or hospital-induced) ailments.

Christian Science and American Law

In the United States, the constitutional guarantee of protection of religious practice from intrusion by government has been used by Christian Scientists and other religious groups to seek exemption from legislative or regulatory requirements regarding child abuse and neglect, including medical neglect in more than three quarters of the states. There are now statutes in 44 states which contain a provision stating that a child is not to be deemed abused or neglected merely because he or she is receiving treatment by spiritual means, through prayer according to the tenets of a recognized religion. Although these exemptions take different forms and interpretations in different state jurisdictions, the overall effect has been to limit the ability of the state to prosecute parents for suspected or alleged abuse or medical neglect of children when such occurrences may be the result of "religious practice." Severe (even fatal) physical discipline, failure to seek medical care, or refusal of a proven efficacious treatment of a critically ill child may be protected from prosecution because of the "religious exemption" clauses now found in a majority of state codes.

Two important sets of interests are in apparent opposition - those of children in the benefits of "proven" medical and health care and those of parents in making a decision about their children's well-being. Some parents believe that a constitutionally protected freedom of religion allows them to deny their children some or all of the "benefits" of standard medical intervention. However, this interpretation of the US constitution is in contradiction to important court rulings to the effect that parents may not martyr their children based on parental beliefs and that children cannot be denied essential health care. See Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 US 158 (1944) and Jehovah's Witnesses v. Washington King County Hospital, 278 F Supp 488 (Washington DC 1967), affirmed per curiam 390 US 598 (1968).

Unclarities within Christian Science

There is some lack of clarity within the teachings of Christian Science on a number of issues. These include the question whether or not Jesus actually died (though since Christian Science teaches that death is an illusion, this may go some way towards explaining apparently contradictory statements on the question in Mary Baker Eddy's writings). There has also been considerable internal controversy in the Christian Science movement regarding the status of Mary Baker Eddy, with some Christian Scientists claiming (and others denying) that her appearance on the world stage was specifically prophesied in the Bible. There is also some lack of clarity as to whether the story of the Fall (from Genesis 2: 4 onwards) is to be regarded as an illusory record, a record of an illusion, or both. Other apparent ambiguities in the writings of Mary Baker Eddy can usually be resolved by considering whether the passage in question had, for the writer, a relative ("mortal" or "material" ) or an absolute ("immortal" or "spiritual") reference.

Criticism of Christian Science

The neutrality of this article or section may be compromised by "weasel words." Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page.

Christian Science has been criticised by skeptics from the very beginning. Mark Twain devoted an entire book to the topic, in which he scathingly attacked not only the belief itself, but also its practitioners. (However, there was some ambivalence in his approach to Christian Science healing.) Christian Science is considered to be a religion, rather than a medical science, by most medical practitioners. Critics point to cases of people who died following their choice of Christian Science care rather than medical treatment. Defenders counter that there is no similar burden placed on medical science to justify the hundreds of thousands who die each year under medical care. The use of Christian Science treatment for children instead of medical means has been highly controversial, particularly when fatalities have followed that use.

The origins of Christian Science have been ascribed to sources as varied as the German philosopher Hegel and a nineteenth-century healer called Phineas Quimby.

Christian Science is criticised by some mainstream Christians for its theological unorthodoxies (most basically its teaching of the illusory nature of the material world, and the unreality of evil).

Christian Science does not explain why the phenomena designated (by some) by the term evil, even though they are claimed to be unreal, seem to be real.

The Journal of the American Medical Association (22 September 1989) reported on a study of more than 5.5 thousand Christian Scientists as compared to a lay group of almost 30 thousand. The death rate among Christian Scientists from cancer was double the national average, and 6 percent of them died from causes considered preventable by doctors. The non-Christian Scientists on the average lived four years longer if they were women and two longer if they were men (it was speculated that the reason for this was that male Christian Scientists are more likely to seek medical help than female believers). Defenders counter that this is very misleading because many people turn to Christian Science after medical techniques have failed.

In the past, Christian Scientists have been criticised for intolerance towards homosexuals (though there is little or nothing in the writings of Mary Baker Eddy on the subject, one way or the other).

Response to Criticism

In response to such criticisms, Christian Scientists argue that their beliefs are philosophically consistent and theologically coherent (e.g. they avoid the theological problem of evil), as well as being practically applicable in healing. They acknowledge that Christian Science healing has not been universally successful, but point out that the same is the case in regard to medical healing (and indeed there may be people who have passed on under detrimental or ineffective medical care, who would have lived had they chosen Christian Science treatment).

A survey regarding the efficacy or otherwise of Christian Science healing would--if scientifically undertaken--need to focus, on the one hand, on a group of people who have relied exclusively on Christian Science for healing, and on the other hand on a comparable group who have used no healing system whatever. (If the latter group used conventional medicine or some other healing system, the result would merely illustrate the comparative efficacy of Christian Science vis-a-vis material medicine--or whatever healing system/s were used--rather than the claim of Christian Science to healing efficacy per se.) Furthermore, the survey would need to allow for the fact that many Christian Scientists are people who have turned to Christian Science as a last resort when other healing means have failed (or who have immediate ancestors in that category) and may consequently be at a comparative disadvantage from a health point of view.

Christian Scientists argue that a study of the life of Mary Baker Eddy, taken as a whole, would reveal a sincere and selfless individual--the kind of person whom it would be difficult to imagine falsifying the origin of her teachings.

Mary Baker Eddy, who lived to the age of almost ninety, was indeed married three times. Her first husband, whom she married at a young age, died of natural causes soon afterwards; her second husband she divorced for his adultery (which he admitted); her third marriage was a happy one, though her husband predeceased her by many years.

Christian Scientists, like Mary Baker Eddy herself, generally defend the separation of church and state as affording a protection for civil freedom and religion. However, it should be noted that Mary Baker Eddy insisted on obedience by Christian Scientists to state laws in regard to health care. Progressively for her time, Mary Baker Eddy was in favour of women's rights, and rejected the "corporeal punishment" of children. (While she generally steered clear of politics per se, she also stated her opposition to imperialism and economic monopoly--The Christian Science Monitor, which she founded, has traditionally been a staunch defender of civil liberties and individual freedom, though it did support the prohibition of alcohol.)

Adherents of Christian Science cite the Bible (Mark 16: 17-18) as an indication that belief in God should be demonstrated in healing. Mary Baker Eddy, however, was no biblical fundamentalist. She wrote: "The decisions by vote of Church Councils as to what should and should not be considered Holy Writ; the manifest mistakes in the ancient versions; the thirty thousand different readings in the Old Testament, and the three hundred thousand in the New,--these facts show how a mortal and material sense stole into the divine record, with its own hue darkening to some extent the inspired pages." (Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, p. 139.)

Homophobic attitudes which may once have existed in the Christian Science movement have largely disappeared, at least at the level of the main (Boston) organization.

Prominent Christian Scientists

Prominent Christian Scientists, past and present, include comedian Joyce Grenfell, UK ambassador to the US Lord Lothian, politician Lady Astor ("one reason why I don't drink is because I wish to know when I am having a good time"), Nixon aides H. R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman, painter Winifred Nicholson and Surrealist artist Joseph Cornell, first American in space Alan Shepard, Academy Award-winning actress Joan Crawford, SETI astrophysicist Dr. Laurance Doyle, actress Carol Channing, Olympic gymnast Shannon Miller, film star Val Kilmer (The Doors etc.), former CIA director Admiral Stansfield Turner, and US Treasury Secretary nominee, Henry M. Paulson, Jr.

Christian Science Organizations

Adventure Unlimited is a Christian Science non-profit organization based in Denver, Colorado. Its purpose is to provide inspirational and educational activities and forums for Christian Scientists, especially children and youth.

Christian Science and Popular Culture

Films suggestive of ideas within Christian Science include The Matrix, Dark City and eXistenZ. There are also some parallels between the writings of Philip K. Dick and Christian Science ideas concerning the illusory nature of human experience.

See also

• Eschatology (cult) – a faction that sprang up from Christian Science since 1912