The Republican journal., 1922-04-27


ments are self-contradictory and there is
lack of a logical, philosophical thought
running through the pages. They suggest
a struggle for light in the darkness and
confusion of mental uncertainty.
AS to the manuscripts themselves, 1T is
recalled that controversy has waged
over them for more than forty years.
Every now and then a canard has been
put forth denying Mrs. Ed1y's statements
as to the source of her discovery and its
development. Furthermore, it should not
be overlooked that the editor of this vol
ume the son of Julius A. Dresser. is a
well-known New Thought advocate, lee
turer and author. He is following in his
fathers footsteps in his efforts to deprive
Mrs. Eddy of her position as Discoverer
and Founder of Christian Science and to
discredit her teachings, and he constantly
presses his claims. 1t has not been re-
vealed whether the manuscripts publish
ed in this book are the originals or the
copies which George Quimby said had
been made of his fathers original VIII
tings by the Misses Ware, himself, and
others. There are many who believe that
during the controversy which mas been
waged around these alleged manuscripts
Tor more than two-score years, there ma
the teaching which Mrs. Eddy herseS
had published in her numerous book
Such a situat on is not without prece-
dent, and that she believed it was prob
able is seen in the statement attached to
her offer to pay for publishing them. No
more should it be overlooked that these
writings have been in the custody OF those
openly hostile to Christian Science, and
that the testimony of persons who ex-
amined them in former years is altogeth-
er contrary to the conclusions OF Dresser
and Riley. Is it not most significant that
a man so hostile to Christian Science as
DR.. LYMAN P. Powell was at one time,
after having carefully examined the
Ouimby manuscripts in preparation for
writing a pamphlet attacking Christian
Science, has recently stated IN the Cam :
bridge History of American Literature:
"Christan Science as 1t Is to-day Is really
its Founders creation. Where she got
this idea, or that, little matters AS
whole, the system described IN Science
and Health is hers, and nothing that can
ever happen will make it less than hers. !"
When he examined these manuscripts he
did not find in them that which led him
to believe that Mrs. Eddy was guilty of
the charge of plagiarism, which Professor
Riley so strenuously forces upon her IN
his review. 1t will be recalled that Or.
Powell was an Episcopal clergyman. for
merly president OF Hobart College. Fur
thermore, it should not be overlooked
that the manuscripts have been offered
for sale from time to time to Christian
Scientists and it's antagonists, indicating
that it was the desire of the owners to
profit from the controversy.
Judge Septimus j. Hanna, man of
scholarly attainment and sound Christian
principles, after personally examining the
Oulmby manuscripts said: 81 can person.
ally say that no intelligent, unbiased per-
son having any understanding or aDliity
to understand Science and Health with
Key to the Scriptures could for single
moment be made to believe that there is
the slightest resemblance between the
two. That the author of the mighty
spiritual truths which form the warp and
wcof of the Christian Science textbook
could have borrowed the smallest ray OF
! light from DR.. Quimby's fragmentary
iottings, however meritorious In them
selves, is too preposterous for moments
serious consideration" christian Science
History, D. 25). Mrs. Anneta G. Dresser,
wife of julius A , in volume entitled
'The Philosophy of Phineas P. Quimby"
(p. 5O, states, "But she (Mrs. Eddy put
her own construction on much OF his
teaching and developed system OF
thought that differed radically from 1t.
1t is worthy of note that only portion
of Ouimby's writings are included in the
volume. and instead of being arranged in
chronolo gical sequence they are arranged
in a way that In the editors judgment