Entitled as above there comes to us, with permission to publish it if we desire, an article so friendly, fair, and candid, that we have more than ordinary pleasure in publishing it. The author is Mr. Martin Sindall of Berlin, N. Y., a minister in the Seventh Day Baptist Church. Mr. Sindall, in his letter transmitting the article, says: "I am reading Science and Health, and also the Sentinel, which is sent to the Berlin reading room. ... I am anxious to know the difference between Christian Science and Divine Science. ... About a month ago I wrote an article on 'Fair Play' to our denominational paper, in reply to an article [criticism] which appeared from the pen of a man in Florida. He spoke of Christian Scientists, their methods, etc., at Sea Breeze, Fla. Are they Christian Scientists, or so-called Divine Scientists? I enclose the article. If you think it good enough, you may publish it over my name with reasons for its appearance as written above."

Mr. Sindall makes request for the answering, editorially, of some queries he submits, which will be duly considered, and we may conclude to answer them. As to this we are not yet fully prepared to say.

Answering Mr. Sindall's question as to the difference between Christian Science and Divine Science, we will say that in "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures," Mrs. Eddy uses these terms interchangeably. Christian Science is Divine Science in the highest sense of the term, for it is based on the divinity of God, the divinity of Christ, and the Scriptures as the divine Word. This is not only the keynote of the text-book, but of the tenets of the Mother Church, which are as follows:—

1. As adherents of Truth we take the inspired Word of the Bible for our guide to eternal Life.

2. We acknowledge and adore one Supreme Infinite God. We acknowledge one Christ, namely, the Holy Ghost or Divine Comforter; and the son Christ Jesus,—man in the divine image and likeness.

3. We acknowledge God's forgiveness of sin in the destruction of sin, and the understanding that sin and sickness are neither real nor eternal.

4. We acknowledge atonement as the efficacy and evidence of divine Love, of man's unity with God, and the great merits of Christ Jesus, the Way-shower.

5. We acknowledge universal salvation as demonstrated by the Galilean prophet, in the power of Truth over all error, sin, sickness, and death; and his resurrection, whereby human faith and understanding are enabled to seize the great possibilities and living energies of divine life.

6. We solemnly promise to strive, watch, and pray for that Mind to be in us which was also in Christ Jesus, to love one another, and to be meek, merciful, just, and pure.

It is clearly seen from both the text-book and the Church Tenets that God is held, in Christian Science, to be not only supreme, but that He is all and in all; that is, that God as infinite Mind and His infinite reflections—man and the universe—constitute the all and in all of Being In the first plank, or subdivision, of what is most aptly termed the "platform," we thus read: "God is infinite, the only Life, Substance, Spirit, or Soul, the only Intelligence of the universe, including man" (Science and Health, p. 330 New Ed.). Again, on p. 587, the Glossary defines God as "The great I am; the all-knowing, all-seeing, all-acting, all-wise, all-loving," etc., while on p. 480 we read: "Man is not God, and God is not man."

No stronger terms could be employed to express God's supremacy and allness.

We cannot speak for all who have assumed the name of Divine Scientists, as we cannot claim to know fully what distinction they undertake to make between Christian Science, and what they are pleased to call Divine Science; but we are sufficiently familiar with the claims of a large per centage of those bearing this name to be able to say, that the teaching of Christian Science is reversed by them. God's supremacy is set aside, and man is elevated to the place of God. In other words, they teach a divine man instead of a divine God. In some of their literature this teaching is more or less obscure; but some come out plainly, assigning to man the identical qualities or attributes Christian Science assigns to God, as above set forth.

Our correspondent, and all others, will see, therefore, at a glance the basic and irreconcilable distinction between the tenets and teaching of Christian Science and those who classify themselves as Divine Scientists.

As to the query about the teaching or claims of those at Sea Breeze, Fla., they do not, as we understand, call themselves either Divine Scientists or Christian Scientists; nor do they claim for their belief anything in the nature of a religion or Christianity. We have recently read this in their official literature.

Following is Mr. Sindall's article, which was prepared for publication in the Sabbath Recorder, a denominational paper of the sect in which Mr. Sindall is a minister:—

If there is one thing above another which the child of God should possess, it is that grace or principle called charity. ...

Love is a divine principle, while charity is love in action; especially in the sense of a kindly deed, or the enlargement of good traits of character in a person's life, rather than the evil ones. With this idea in mind we may look upon charity and fair play as first cousins: they are closely related. He who lives in the Golden Rule atmosphere will be charitable, and will be able to say, "Another person has just as good a right to think, speak, and act as I have, if he manifests an interest in the welfare of humanity. Any one person is not to believe that he is the sole possessor of all truth. It is unsafe to live within a certain number of iron-clad rules, believing there are no others yet beyond our vision. A true life grows. Rules may be good, but they should not be iron bands. 'Rules are fetters only to men of no genius.' "

We learn by studying. We grow by imbibing. It may be that some new-fangled idea or fad will even possess something of merit, of truth, and by studying it, or coming in contact with it, we may imbibe something which will aid in our spiritual development. At least, let us be charitable towards those in modern religious life, even though some may denominate their claims fads, new-fangled ideas, and modern inventions. Give them fair play. If they are of God they will prosper; if not, they will come to naught. The ideas thus far, and those which are to follow are inspired by an article under "Florida" in last week's Recorder. A book often sells in greater numbers because of severe criticism. Christian Science seems to thrive in the midst of its critics. The writer of this article has more than ordinary respect for the brother who wrote the article, but would like to ask, Would it not be wise to know as much as possible about a certain religious sect before we criticise its methods and devotees too freely? A person cannot present a good criticism upon a book unless he has first read or studied that book. This holds true of all religious beliefs. Do not take somebody's say-so.

The writer is not a Christian Scientist, but has read a large amount of literature, not only from Mrs. Eddy's pen, but from many others who are one with her in belief. A few quotations from their writings will answer the Florida brother better than any words of mine. In their Journal for December, 1901, page 534, we read:—

"The Founder of Christianity declared, 'The works that I do shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do.' His disciples healed the sick, and the church for the first three hundred years of its history was obedient to the entire command of the Master, to preach, and heal.

"According to the teachings of the New Testament, you can no more divorce practical works from the religion of Jesus than you can take the blue from the sky, or love from a mother's heart. Said one apostle, 'Faith without works is dead;' and the beloved disciple declared, 'He that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?'

"It is sometimes said that healing ended with the life of the Master, and it is also declared that it is not a part of religion to heal the sick. It has been stated that Jesus healed the sick because of the power which he possessed and which none others had. The words of Jesus and the practice of the early church do not bear out that statement. He declared, 'These signs shall follow them that believe; ... They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.' The works which Jesus accomplished, his disciples did likewise. If we are without these practical works, then are we without that feature which made the religion of Jesus unique.

"Christian Science would have it distinctly understood that its healing is not accomplished through will-power or animal magnetism. The false healer declares, 'I can of mine own self do everything.' Jesus said, 'I can of mine own self do nothing;' it is 'the Father that dwelleth in me, He doeth the works.' Again he said, 'Not my will, but thine, be done.' So in Christian Science, God is the Healer. The less there is of self, the more there will be of the Father. The Christian Scientist seeks not to exalt self, but to exalt God. In himself he is nothing. With God, he becomes a power for righteousness.

"The teaching of Christian Science is that God made all that was made, and behold, it was very good. It declares that all that is true, and beautiful, and good, is permanent. It takes from man only what he does not want, and leaves him the good, the beautiful, and the true. It agrees with the apostle who said, 'The things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.'

Again, this system is questioned because of its supposed teaching as to the unreality of sickness. To the sick, there is nothing that seems so real and genuine as pain. This healing gospel does not dispute that, to their sense of things, suffering is real. Just as the mistakes in mathematics are no real part of the science of mathematics, so it is held that sickness is not a part of the Kingdom of God, that it is a false condition which will give way to the truth. This religion holds that life and health are positive, that sickness is negative and not the real part of man. Had Jesus regarded sickness as a part of God's kingdom and something real and eternal, he would not, and he could not, have healed it, for what is of God endures. To him sickness was not of God, and therefore he could and did destroy it."

In regard to Mrs. Eddy, the Founder of Christian Science, a former resident of Boston says:—

"It was my privilege to live in the home city of the Founder and Discoverer of Christian Science. From the people there, and from others whom I have met, I have learned her history. She was born of pious and godly parents. So pure and true was her early childhood that a sainted clergyman said of her that she was sanctified before she had birth. She was always a great student of the Bible, and at her mother's knee was taught that prayer to God would heal the sick and sinful. In childhood even, she banished sickness by an appeal to her heavenly Father. As she grew to womanhood her thoughts were upon God and the ministry of helpfulness. I met one who knew her in her early married life, and she told me that it was a joy and comfort to visit Mrs. Eddy in those early days and be blessed by her gracious presence. I have met another who later knew her before she discovered Christian Science, but when her thoughts were upon helping others, and she banished pain and brought relief to this suffering one through the love she bore to God and man. In 1866, having met with an accident which the physicians declared was incurable, she turned from earth to heaven, and opening her Bible to the healing work of Jesus, the Christ power which through him made whole the diseased, blessed her, and she arose from her bed of pain healed and well. She saw that the same power which healed her would heal others, and she gave three years of devoted study of the Bible that she might make known this law of Love to others. She sought not to keep the secret to herself, but her whole desire was to make clear to others that religion of Christ which banished sickness and sorrow and gave joy and health. She is now the Leader of the mighty movement, and the same loving trust in God which marked her early days is with her now, the same tender sympathy for the afflicted adds a beauty and a grace to the charm of years. All her waking hours are given to benefit humanity. She has been misunderstood, but she has not faltered in her love to God or her fidelity to man.

"To those who have studied the religion of Jesus in the light of Christian Science, it is indeed the royal law of Love. It has banished pain and suffering, it has healed the sick and sinful, and made white the stained robes of the fallen. It has put before man a star of hope and cheered him with the eternal presence of the living Christ."

Do you believe in the brotherhood of man? Do you believe in charity? Do you believe in fair play? If so

Martin Sindall.

We deeply appreciate the Christianly spirit which moved Mr. Sindall to attempt to correct unjust criticism in his own denominational organ. He had read the Christian Science text-book and the official periodicals sufficiently to see the injustice of the adverse criticism and the misapprehension upon which it was based, and with commendable brotherly love, he sought to correct it.

Would those who are so ready to criticise Christian Science, and its consecrated head, the Rev. Mary Baker Eddy, do themselves, as well as Christian Science and Mrs. Eddy, the justice to read of it and of her life and character in the same intelligent and fair spirit, they would withhold their criticism, for they would see no cause therefor.