The daily morning journal and courier., 1907-05-03

tion, misrepresentation and ignorant ridicule.
 Christian Science does not deny that all these appearances seem real to our ense-consciousness. It does not treat them as merely imaginary, as has been incorrectly stated by some of it's crit ics. But it seeks to define and classify them with scientific accuracy. It finds that Jesus taught and proved the non- reality of the appearances which He overcame, and that accordingly Jesus promised His followers: "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free!"
 Of what shall the truth free us? Not from what is true-truth frees us only from what is false.
 And Jesus, with His supreme under standing of the truth, overcame sin, sickness, and their like, as the false hoods, not the truths, of our being.
 If they had been truths they could not have been overcome. It finds that Paul had the same classification in mind when he wrote of the things which are seen as being temporal and the things which are not seen as eter- nal. It finds that this classification is the only one which can possibly har- monize with the scriptural statement that God saw that everything which He had made was very good. It is only what is not good, and therefore not of God. which Christian Science seeks to overcome, anything which is good, or reality. It is only what is false, not good, not real, which needs to be overcome or which can be over- come.
 Do you think that Jesus would have overcome, or taught His followers to try to overcome, anything which was not of God?
 This brings us to a brief considera- tion of the latest teachings of the phy- sical sciences in respect to the non reality of matter, according to its true definition and classification,
 For all the phenomena of evil are connected with and incident to that form of human consciousness which relates to what we term the physical or material universe.
 The appetites and passions from which our race suffers, all have their origin in these concepts of matter, mat ter being used as the generic term for the physical universe.
 It is true that until few decades ago the physical scientists were large ly materialistic in their views, regard ing matter as either the sole reality or as dual reality with God, This was at the half way station in their Investigations. Now the greatest among them are, nearly all of them, taking the same view of matter or the material universe, that it is phenom- enal, and not the reality, which WAS taken by the discoyerer of Christian Science more than thirty years ago. 1 It is within the last few months, for example, that MT. Balfour, the prime minister of England, who Is g noted natural scientist, as a statesman, as president of meeting of the natural scientists in England made the re- mark, in his ending address, that the natural scientists were now explaining matter by explaining 1t away. Of course, this epigrammatic statement is not to be understood as declaring that matter does not appear real to our five l physical senses. It means that these appearances are not to be accepted as proving the reality of matter in the materialistic meaning given to the term reality It means that the natural scientists are showing by their inves- ] tigations that materialism Is an utterly false theory Materialism accepts mat ter for what it appears to be to our 1 nse-consciousness but the natural sciences are now proving that these Appearances are wholly unreliable, and that materialism is really crass de- ception.
 l Foremost among modern physical scientists are the names of Huxley, Tyndall, Herbert Spencer. Professor Huxley wrote q repudiate as philo- sophical error the doctrine of material ism" Professor Herbert Spencer wrote. 1T have had to rebut the charge of materialism times too numerous to re- - tIltllUtI. 4IpltSSOI NIIdHb AIltIl, MT1l- ling of the late Professor Tyndall says; "The charge of materialism could only be brought against such a man by
 those abject materialsts who have never had a glimpse of the profounder
 fact that the universe as known to us consists wholly of mind, and that mat
 ter is a doubtful and uncertain infer I oP tt,ta De-,
 lessor Huxley also wrote: What is
 this thing called matter, after all, ex- cept the unknown suppositional cause lof states of our own consciousness?
 That is to say, We know what we think
 according to our se-perceptions
 what an object is, but we do not know
 what is the reality behind the appear ance We may, for example, say that
 a metal is opaque. But We only know
 that to the human sense 1t is opaque
 Beings with different eyes say witt
 X-ray or N-ray eyes, might accept i
 as transparent. The fact that the en-
 tire human race has the same kind O
 eyes, or sense-perception and sense
 consciousness concerning physical ob
 jects, only proves that things have
 substantially the same appearances tC
 all human beings. But this is alst
 proven by the appearance to the sense.
 of all human, beings that the sun rises
 in the east and sets in the west, that
 a straight oar seems to be bent under.
 heath the water, that two parallel iror
 rails seem to approach each other ir
 the distant railroad track, and by man!
 like instances.
 Is it not about time that the batter
 ies of ignorant ridicule which hay
 been directed against Christian science
 because of it's scientific definition ant