New-York tribune., 1909-11-08
MRS. STETS0N NOT
MENTAL ASSASSIN
SHE DENIES CHARGES
OF STRICKLER.
Reitcrates Her Loyalty to
Mother Chmch-Pupl En-
plans Testimony.

cause and centre Of the entire 9rair.
came cut yesterday with an extensivs
statement. She leads off with the dec
laration that she does not defy ths
Mother Church
In regard 70 the extracts from Virgil
O. Stricklers diary. published in Tbs
Tribune. Mrs. Stetson says that her only
answer 70 the first readers statements -
an emphatic denial In describing tho
events directly after her return from
Boston last July. however. which Is the
time mentioned by Mr.. Strickler. Mrs.
Stetson agrees that she did intimate q,
the practitioners the possibility OF their
neins called TO Boston TO testify "a TO
what they understood BY malpractice
We then discussed at length" says
Mrs. StetsOn, how we handled nlalprsc.
tise'
she goes on 20 say that in this discus.
sion she found most OF the practitioners,
except Mr.. Strickler. clear in their undsr-
standing OF the difference between men,
tai malpractice and mental self-derenc..
Mental self-protection. she then explains.
might take some such form az that d.
scrlbed in the testimony given before ths
Boston inquiry. II should speak 70 tbs
person. addressing him bv name % saws
Mrs. Stetson. which was what was testf..
ned to by Mrs Kate Y. Remer in Boz-
ton.
MRS STETSONS CONDITIONS.
Mrs. Stetson's statement was given ous
only with the agreement that IN shouls
oe used without any change and with ir
she supplied also the following head
lines. which she said must precede Nh.
statement, Mrs Stetson's Answer.
Avows Her Loyalty 20 the Mother
Church. EmphaticaHy Denies Mr..
strickier's Interpretation Of Her Teach
ings'
The statement was given out by her
secretary, who brought the word also
that Mrs. Stetson would say nothing fur
ther, and would not entertain any aues-
tions
IL was pointed out 20 the secretary.
however. that In view OF Mr.. StrickIe-'s
statement regarding "testifylng in the
absolute. or from the fourth dimension Of
the spirit" il would be almost necessary
for Mrs Stetson TO answer this ques-
hon.
Is this statement made by Mrs. Stet-
son from the fourth dimension Of the
sririt?"
she is speaking as Christian scien-
tist" was the answer.
MRS STETSON'S STATEMENT.
Mrs Stetson's statement in fun fol-
lows:
i wish to state here most emphsticsny
that l do not defy the Mother Church, nor
tne constituted authorities OF the Mother
church (the Christian Science Board oe
DtrectOrsl; neither do my followers. who
are loyal Christian Scientists-loyaI 10 God
loyal TO their beloved teacher. Mrs Eddy
and TO the teachings OF Christian Science.
as as, found tn tb IN science and Health. with
EDDY; the discoverer and founder OF Chris
Upon examination OF the witnesses who
had appeared IN Boston before the board
OF directors, and whom our trustees were
told TO investigate without fear or favor
these witnesses showed a clear understand
mg OF Christian Science and true Christian
Science practice In justice TO these prsc-
tiuoners, after thorough and impartial
examination of all the Witnesses. ''without
fear or favor, the committee OF inquiry
appointed by the board OF trustees OF First
Church OF Christ. Scientist OF New York
city. rendered the verdict OF mot guilty"
In doing this, they were acting within their
own jurisdiction and not IN any spirit OF
defiance OF the directors Of the Mother
Church.
ing the So-called claims OF hypnotism. mes
merism- Occultism witchCraft and the COM
bined forces of sovCalled evil. which Chris
ton Scientists prove 70 be powerless when
met with the right understanding OF truth.
l was a member of the board OF trIs-
tees that had To pass upon my teachings
and practice OF Christian Science. i vol
unfairly relinquished the right os being
present drrlng the inquiry. I never re-
Guested or desired the persons CONDUCTING;
authorities Of the Mother Church on ~.
Il - VTrh II an. rsrJ
God and my beloved isader. S Mary a1gS Bsssr sR1r
| Judgment until they had heard all the evi-
/ dence.
HAS COMPLIED WITH ORDERS.
I During the inquiry I notified the directors
Of the Mother Church that I would comply
strictly with their orders. and / advised
I the New York committee of inquiry that L
/ had done this. j have fully compiled with
the orders Of the directors Of the Mother
| Church
/ During this period there were repeated
/ publications OF false reports 20 the effect
l that l was resisting the constituted au-
tkOrities OF the Mother Church. also. that
| / was influencing others to do so. particu-
lsrly the authorities OF the First Churcn
/ OF Christ (ScienusD, New York CITY,
naent that these reports were false: f,Ir-
thermore. thar I never was more loyal 70
| my beloved leader. Mrs. Eddy. or to Chris
/ tian Science, and thai TO student OF Minis
would ever separate himself from Christian
I Science with my approval
In answer 10 the statements in Mr.
/ Strickler's diary. I can only say. i never
/ knew its contents. and the statements con
J tanned therein are absolutely 80 involved
| and hlled with MISREPRESENTATION and re-
I versal OF truth a. 70 be incOnprehensiblc.
The onlv answer Is an emphatic dental.
/ ] will briefly review what happened az ths
/ time and place cited by him on July 81.
/ 1855.
\ on my return from Boston we had the
/ practitioners meeting, as usual hrst the
/ reading OF the Bible lesson. az the con-
/ clusiOn OF which. was our custom, We
/ discussed the problems pertaining to our
/ Christian Science work At this tiISe 7 in
/ timstsd % the practitiOners the possibility
/ OF their being called upon by the board
/ plain what they understood by malprac-
tice. At the same time I IN no Way either
told or intimatsd 20 them that 7 had beer,
I in Boston or that i expected 20 20. We
I then discussed az length how We handel
/ malpractice. also the difference between
| that and the true practice OF self -protec-
I tion. or defence, against malicious ANNA /
7 magnetism (Of evil thoughts and their sf-
+ feet on the human hody): Furthermore e.
what Is implied by personal control"
STEICKLER AN EXCEPTION
found all but three or four clear n,
/ their Understandings Among thosa who
/ were confused was Mr.. Stricklsr and Z
/ was surprised 10 ind that he seerni nssv
/ could not grasp the metaphysical poirt
that there exists a difference hetWeen men
tai malpractice and self-defence. and aues-
. tiC ned the use OF names IN self-prOtection
Z I VIII give as an illustration what i IN
/ derstand the difference 20 be between men