Now that the Rev. Mr.—has renewed his attack upon...

The Springfield (Mass.) Union

Now that the Rev. Mr.—has renewed his attack upon Christian Science through your columns, I trust that you will again permit me to answer by the same means. In my former letter I offered as a definition of substance, "that which is real, in distinction from that which is apparent." The critic's comment on this is indeed interesting. He takes issue with it as being "in perfect accord with Christian Science definitions. That is to say, it is wide of the mark." Perhaps I should have saved him from this mistake by citing the New International dictionary, from which the definition was taken. It is practically the same as can be found in school books, encyclopedias, and other standard works of reference; hence it expresses natural science or philosophy as much as it does Christian Science.

Our critic's letter to the Union furnishes another reason for refering to those repositories of general information, the larger dictionaries. He challenges me to "tell us what principle is conscious." I will reply in the words of the Oxford English dictionary, "Soul, the principle of thought and action in man;" also in the words of the Century dictionary, "Spirit, the principle of life;" again, in the words of the New Standard dictionary, "Spirit, the principle of self-consciousness, self-activity, and of rational power in general ; that which signifies a likeness in man to the Divine Being." It is also possible to answer in the words of St. Paul, "Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves ; but our sufficiency is of God ;" and in the words of Mrs. Eddy, "Intelligence is . . . the primal and eternal quality of infinite Mind, of the triune Principle,—Life, Truth, and Love,—named God" (Science and Health, p. 469).

January 9, 1915
Contents

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit