Moral Science belongs to God, and is the expression or revelation of love, wisdom and truth. It reaches the understanding, first, through inspiration, and secondly, by explanation. Those who receive it must obey its requirements if they would understand it. . . . The idea that expresses moral science is physical, and we see this idea traced out in one continuous page of nature’s bright and glorious character. Every blade of grass, tree and flower, declare, “How manifold are thy works, O Lord! in wisdom hast thou made them all.”

The entire creation of God symbolizes nothing else but wisdom, love and truth. All that He hath made is harmonious, joy-giving and eternal. He also made man in His “image and likeness,” and this must be a perfect man. . . .

Moral Science is to put down sin and suffering through the understanding that God created them not, nor made He man to be the servant to his body. . . . All forms of suffering and disease, and even the winds and waves, obeyed the man, Jesus, through his God-being. . . .

. . . To be able to control our bodies by the soul, i.e. through God, is to be able not to let our bodies control us through the senses. . . . If ties of sense weaken, as the stronger and more enduring ties of soul strengthen, what matter? Love is not thus lost, but nearer, far, as we approach God, who is love. . . . All that is truth and its idea . . . is immortal; . . . but mortality is not imagination, nor to be sneered at; rather is it to be understood so that it may be destroyed, even as Jesus gave the example, by bringing to light immortality. . . .

So far as I understand it, mesmerism is neither truth nor its idea, i.e. it is neither moral nor physical science, but simply an ism, originating in belief, by which one belief drives away another one, and the last may be even worse than the first. This, therefore, originates with man, and not with God. Mesmer was the author of it, and never, to my knowledge, did he claim it was Moral Science; and I, who know no more of the practice of mesmerism than does a kitten, and think much less of it than did the originator, would be loath to steal his  ● ● ●