St. John spiritually discerned and revealed the sum total of transcendentalism. He saw the real earth and heaven. They were spiritual, not material; and they [10] were without pain, sin, or death. Death was not the door to this heaven. The gates thereof he declared were inlaid with pearl,—likening them to the priceless under- standing of man’s real existence, to be recognized here and now. [15] The great Way-shower illustrated Life unconfined, un- contaminated, untrammelled, by matter. He proved the superiority of Mind over the flesh, opened the door to the captive, and enabled man to demonstrate the law of Life, which St. Paul declares “hath made me free from [20] the law of sin and death.” The stale saying that Christian Science “is neither Christian nor science!” is to-day the fossil of wisdom- less wit, weakness, and superstition. “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” [25] Take courage, dear reader, for any seeming mysti- cism surrounding realism is explained in the Scripture, “There went up a mist from the earth [matter];” and the mist of materialism will vanish as we approach spirit- uality, the realm of reality; cleanse our lives in Christ’s [30] righteousness; bathe in the baptism of Spirit, and awake in His likeness. CHAPTER III. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS. [Page 31.] _What do you consider to be mental malpractice? [1]_ Mental malpractice is a bland denial of Truth, and is the antipode of Christian Science. To mentally argue in a manner that can disastrously affect the happiness of a fellow-being—harm him [5] morally, physically, or spiritually—breaks the Golden Rule and subverts the scientific laws of being. This, therefore, is not the use but the abuse of mental treat- ment, and is mental malpractice. It is needless to say that such a subversion of right is not scientific. Its [10] claim to power is in proportion to the faith in evil, and consequently to the lack of faith in good. Such false faith finds no place in, and receives no aid from, the Principle or the rules of Christian Science; for it denies the grand verity of this Science, namely, that God, good, [15] has _all_ power. This leaves the individual no alternative but to re- linquish his faith in evil, or to argue against his own convictions of good and so destroy his power to be or to do good, because he has no faith in the _omnipotence_ [20] of God, good. He parts with his understanding of good, in order to retain his faith in evil and so succeed with his [Page 32.] wrong argument,—if indeed he desires success in this [1] broad road to destruction. _How shall we demean ourselves towards the students_ _of disloyal students? And what about that clergyman’s_ _remarks on __“__Christ and Christmas__”__?_ [5]