Editing Antoinism (section)

===Healing===
Although focused on healing, Antoinism does not propose any diagnosis nor [[Medical prescription|prescription]], and does not practice the [[laying on of hands]];<ref>{{cite book |title=Le nuove sette religiose |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-i83CZxw5B4C|first=Michele C. |last=Del Re |publisher=Gremese Editore |place=Rome |year=1997 |language=it |pages=47, 48 |isbn=88-7742-107-X}}</ref> the faithful may also resort to traditional medicine. In the books of the temple, it is stated that ''desservants'' are not allowed to discourage them to consult a doctor and they should pray that they find an "inspired" doctor. Generally, consulting an Antoinist healer is merely a supplement to [[conventional medicine]].<ref>[[#Masse|Massé, 2002]], p. 51.</ref><ref>[[#Begot2|Bégot, 2000]], § 44–46.</ref> Because of its healer doctrine, the religious group is almost always compared to [[Christian Science]];<ref>See the vast majority of the sources of the article</ref> however, in spite of several similarities with this religion as well as with [[Friedrich Hegel]]'s works, Belgian historian Pierre Debouxhtay rejected the idea that they could have been potential influences on Antoine's doctrines.<ref>[[#Debouxhtay|Debouxhtay, 1945]], p. 14.</ref> According to him, it is possible that Antoine was influenced by [[Doukhobors]].<ref name="Debouxhtay49"/>

When Antoine was alive, many observers thought that the healings he obtained resulted to [[suggestion]] only,<ref>[[#Debouxhtay2|Debouxhtay, 1934]], p. 166.</ref> and Dr. Schuind, who wrote two articles in ''The Meuse'' (''La Meuse'') on the subject at the time, criticized the lack of control and vague diagnostics surrounding these healings.<ref>[[#Debouxhtay2|Debouxhtay, 1934]], pp. 168,174.</ref> Sociologist Anne-Cécile Bégot considered the Antoinist healing of the first decades a form of protest against (1) the efficiency of medicine,<ref>[[#Bergeron|Bergeron, 1998]], p. 188.</ref> (2) the traditional representation of disease<ref>[[#Bergeron|Bergeron, 1998]], p. 189.</ref>—the real healing can be attained only through a new approach to the disease, which is never considered a particular misfortune and thus is not reduced to its biological dimension—and (3) the management of disease<ref>[[#Bergeron|Bergeron, 1998]], p. 191.</ref>—the sick are always responsible for their own illness. However, she concluded that this protest has evolved throughout time as (1) the disease is now represented on an [[endogenous]] etiological model, which indicates a process of individualization of the religion,<ref>[[#Bergeron|Bergeron, 1998]], p. 195.</ref> and (2) the personal real-life experience is more presented as the cause of the disease than the relation to the global society.<ref>[[#Bergeron|Bergeron, 1998]], p. 196.</ref>