My Dear Friend:—In reply to your good letter I will try to tell you something of my impressions of Christian Science. I wish I might do justice to the beautiful truths that have come into my life.

Because of a mistake of my own I will say, first, do not accept anything you cannot understand, remembering, of course, that one cannot expect to fully comprehend some of the deeper truths until he has demonstrated some of the lesser or introductory ones.

In my own case, I soon found from the personnel that this people were one in whom I could place confidence, for they seemed to be those referred to in the following line: "Through whom the current of everlasting life flows still and deep and strong." I felt that no harm could come to me among those who professed to be controlled by Love alone and, indeed, whose lives indicated it. So I have been content to drift, to go slowly, and quietly and surely develop, for "Heaven is not reached at a single bound." What I mean is this: Refuse to coerce your reason or think you must indulge in any mental aberrations, as I thought, for remember that spirituality, which is merely the capacity for understanding Truth, is the very perfection of reason.

I like to believe that "truth should be self-evident," that which, in the very nature of things, is the most natural, and I have come to doubt that profession of Christianity which requires a certain forced and emotional enthusiasm to keep worked up to the proper religious ecstasy and sanctity. But it seems to me that the true religion should be so attuned to the "eternal fitness of things" that it is the most natural way to live to one who has really the simple wish to live aright. Nor can I see the wisdom of scaring people into "Heaven, a place of love," by fear of a place called hell, and giving them only the somewhat indefinite instruction to believe in Christ and fear God. Is it not better to be won into heaven by Love, to know that sins are not forgiven until they are destroyed, and to so understand what Heaven and Love and God are, that it appeals to and controls your thought, so that your acts are good because your thoughts are good? Heretofore my religion has been something that while I feared to deny it I did not understand it.

I no longer look upon heaven as a place somewhere of gates and gold and luxurious repose, nor upon God as an impossible being, like Santa Claus; for did not Jesus say, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for behold, the kingdom of God is within you." Heaven is not a place, it is a condition, and, best of all, it is right here! God is the Life, Intelligence, and Power of the universe. Life is eternal and the true man is immortal. Was not Christ always trying to turn men from the material to the spiritual? But see how the Bible is materialized to-day. I have gotten much more out of my Bible since trying to read it spiritually and understanding the allegorical illustrations.

Science and Health says that God is all. I had no difficulty in believing that there is no life in matter. Matter of itself is dead, and it seems to have life only as it is possessed of some property, which, however, is not intrinsic.

Is sin real? As we commonly use the word it most certainly is. It would seem to be an abuse of reason to say darkness is anything. Darkness is nothing—it is the absence of something. We popularly speak of negations such as this as though they were something in themselves. Sin is the absence of God or Good. As I understand it, the reason Christian Scientists speak of sin as unreal is this. The Bible says that God made everything that was made, and it was good; so, according to the Scriptures, God did not make evil and God made all that was made.

You understand that it is useless to argue terms; to get the meaning of the statement you must attribute to each word of the statement the intended meaning of the author. So let us see what Mrs. Eddy means by saying sin is unreal. Is a lie real? The question is not, Was a lie really told? but, Was what was told really so? The word real is a synonym of the word truth. Now, a lie is never truthful—its acceptance as the truth depends entirely upon the credulity of the hearer, but this does not make it a truth. I might believe you were president, and to the extent that I recognized your orders and supposed status, your presidency would be real to me. You will see from this that only that is real which is real in the realm of abstract truth, irrespective of any perverted and individual application.

Is matter real? To our present sense it is real, but we may spiritually discern its true status. Having in time, indeed, reached the absolute understanding of Mind we shall see that even matter and our bodies, also are themselves only mortal beliefs, and that Mind alone is real or truthful. However, this is post-graduate understanding and it need not trouble us now. What our office is, is to see that matter, or our bodies, do not dominate us, but that they are our humble and obedient servants as we rise to the true power and dignity of man's estate.

As to the sect of Christian Scientists, I will say simply this—that there is nothing in a name. Put away your literature, do what you will, go where you can, and find the truth. Search for it in the Bible, in nature, among the stars, anywhere—there can be only one interpretation of existence which is true, and having found the truth call it what you will—X, Y, or Z—but if it is the truth, Christian Scientists believe it will coincide with what Mrs. Eddy has found and which she has for designatory and convenient reasons named Christian Science, and the name seems peculiarly appropriate.

You asked me if it was another kind of philosophy. If by "philosophy" you mean truth, I will say there can be but one kind of truth, and I believe Christian Science to be truthful. If, however, you refer to the common meaning of philosophy, as indicating a system of manmade made wisdom or man-evolved judgment, I will say Christian Science is not that. In the ordinary sense of the term, any doctrine founded absolutely upon the Scriptures and attributed to a divine source, is not philosophy according to the latter meaning.

All truth, however, is divine, but i believe the philosopher considers his wisdom as self-evolved.

How sweet life is when lived aright, and let us wake up and live. Sincerely yours,

Arthur T. Morey.

In the Denver (Col.) Times.