To take all earth’s beauty into one gulp of vacuity and label beauty nothing, is ignorantly to caricature God’s creation, which is unjust to human sense and [5] to the divine realism. In our immature sense of spirit- ual things, let us say of the beauties of the sensuous universe: “I love your promise; and shall know, some time, the spiritual reality and substance of form, light, and color, of what I now through you discern dimly; and [10] knowing this, I shall be satisfied. Matter is a frail con- ception of mortal mind; and mortal mind is a poorer representative of the beauty, grandeur, and glory of the immortal Mind.” _Please inform us through your Journal; if you sent_ [15] _Mrs. —— to ——. She said that you sent her there to look_ _after the students; and also, that no one there was working_ _in Science,—which is certainly a mistake._ I never commission any one to teach students of mine. After class teaching, he does best in the investigation of [20] Christian Science who is most reliant on himself and God. My students are taught the divine Principle and rules of the Science of Mind-healing. What they need thereafter is to study thoroughly the Scriptures and “Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures.” To [25] watch and pray, to be honest, earnest, loving, and truth- ful, is indispensable to the demonstration of the truth they have been taught. If they are haunted by obsequious helpers, who, un- called for, imagine they can help anybody and steady [30] God’s altar—this interference prolongs the struggle [Page 88.] and tends to blight the fruits of my students. A faith- [1] ful student may even sometimes feel the need of physical help, and occasionally receive it from others; but the less this is required, the better it is for that student. [5] _Please give us, through your Journal, the name of_ _the author of that genuine critique in the September_ _number, __“__What Quibus Thinks.__”_ I am pleased to inform this inquirer, that the author of the article in question is a Boston gentleman whose [10] thought is appreciated by many liberals. Patience, ob- servation, intellectual culture, reading, writing, exten- sive travel, and twenty years in the pulpit, have equipped him as a critic who knows whereof he speaks. His allu- sion to Christian Science in the following paragraph, [15] glows in the shadow of darkling criticism like a mid- night sun. Its manly honesty follows like a benediction after prayer, and closes the task of talking to deaf ears and dull debaters. “We have always insisted that this Science is natural, [20] spiritually natural; that Jesus was the highest type of real nature; that Christian healing is supernatural, or extra-natural, only to those who do not enter into its sublimity or understand its modes—as imported ice was miraculous to the equatorial African, who had never [25] seen water freeze.” _Is it right for a Scientist to treat with a doctor?_