Thus begins a familiar hymn: and in these lines is voiced a universal yearning of the human heart for tidings of the coming of day, tidings of better, happier times for the sons of men. And note the one to whom this question is addressed. A watchman. One groper in the dark is not apt to ask directions of another groper equally lost in the gloom. Will he not seek out that thought which is vigilant, wakeful, which knows beyond per-adventure the signs of the coming of the dawn?

It will pay the student of Christian Science to look up in an unabridged dictionary the meanings of the words "watch" and "watchful," and then in the Concordances to the writings of Mary Baker Eddy to trace their metaphysical implications. The importance of watchfulness, wakefulness, vigilance, to the seeker after divine Truth cannot be overestimated.

Mrs. Eddy indicates this in the opening paragraph of the Preface to "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures," where she says, "The wakeful shepherd beholds the first faint morning beams, ere cometh the full radiance of a risen day." And a Christian Scientist studying the references under the theme of watchfulness will rejoice when he finds Mrs. Eddy's vital article "Watching versus Watching Out" on page 232 of "The First Church of Christ, Scientist, and Miscellany." Here is one of our vigilant Leader's most valuable instructions to her followers. Certainly, after a prayerful perusal of this clarion call to alertness, the Scientist must sense the importance of both watching and watching out, and thus exemplify in his own thinking that spiritual vigilance and awareness indicated in the words of Jesus (Luke 12: 37), "Blessed are those servants, whom the Lord when he cometh shall find watching."

Christian watching and watchfulness imply, first of all, being awake, awake to the glories of Truth and claiming Truth's healing promises, and then watching out against the enemies of mortal sense and self—the "little foxes, that spoil the vines" (S. of Sol. 2:15). The charge, therefore, that Christian Scientists blandly close their eyes to evil and its claims is fatuous. On another page of Science and Health Mrs. Eddy has written (p. 447), "To put down the claim of sin, you must detect it, remove the mask, point out the illusion, and thus get the victory over sin and so prove its unreality." Scientific watchfulness is thus seen to involve first the detection of evil's claims, and then their nullification through the joyous realization of the allness of God, good.

May attention be directed to a little fox which spoils many a vine of Christian demonstration? The name of this spoiler is unloving, captious criticism; and how often does it slip past a careless watchman! Now, criticism which constructively judges or evaluates true worth and aids in improving one's work should be as welcome as the flowers of spring; but carping faultfinding, which the Scripture calls "biting" and "devouring" one another, is without doubt the adversary's most efficient method of bringing separation among brethren and engendering continual warfare.

When we see our brother in an unlovely light, when we balloon his errors and idiosyncrasies without any definite thought of bringing about a healing, what are we doing? Are we not violating any number of the Commandments? First, we are believing in more than one God, for we are accepting as real that which belongs not to that creation pronounced in the Bible "very good." We are erecting false images, certainly; we are taking the name (the nature) of divine Love in vain; we are killing; we are stealing; we are adulterating truth; and last, but not least, we are bearing false witness against the neighbor. Does not this place the error called unchristian criticism near the top in the list of the foxes, the would-be spoilers of the vine, which should be detected and rejected?

A Christian Scientist was asked to do some healing work for a sick child, but for the first two days no improvement was noted; in fact, the little one seemed gravely ill. Obedient to his Leader's counsel that in the case of an infant the metaphysical work should be largely with the parent's thought (see Science and Health, p. 412), the Scientist had a loving, searching talk with the mother. In the course of their conversation, the mother admitted that she was unduly critical of others; in fact, the tendency to criticize harshly she considered a family trait. She and the Scientist then denied the power and presence of this error in God's universe of love and law. The watchmen were watchful. Error was being scientifically dealt with.

Then the Scientist asked the mother to make up a list of every person of her acquaintance whom she was inclined to criticize. She was then to give herself a specific treatment concerning her thought of each one of them. She was not to relinquish the work until she saw each one on that list as man really is, the child of God reflecting His qualities. Shortly thereafter the mother reported remarkable fruitage from this Christly activity. When she returned to her home after the visit with the Scientist, an aunt said, out of a clear sky, "I have been thinking that I'm inclined to be very critical of others, and I must stop it!" Then a brother called her on the telephone and said, "It has just occurred to me that I have been too critical of people." Then her mother arrived and announced that she realized she had a tendency to be overly critical and was resolved to conquer this trait. Shortly thereafter a relative from a near-by city said, over the telephone, "We are all too critical, and ought to stop it!" With this wholesome clarifying of the mental atmosphere, the little child was speedily healed. Love, divine Love, was the victor.

O Christian Scientist, dealing with the big and little foxes of the mesmerism of materiality, hear the warning of the great Shepherd (Mark 13:37), "What I say unto you, I say unto all. Watch"!

John Randall Dunn