Page:Christian Science versus Pantheism.djvu/53

Rh last November) there spring spontaneously the higher hope, and increasing virtue, fervor, and fidelity. The special benediction of our Father-Mother God rests upon this hour: “Blessed are ye when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.”

We hear it said the Christian Scientists have no God because their God is not a person. Let us examine this. The loyal Christian Scientists absolutely adopt Webster's definition of God, “A Supreme Being,” and the Standard dictionary's definition of God, “The one Supreme Being, self-existent and eternal.” Also, we accept God, emphatically, in the higher definition derived from the Bible, and this accords with the literal sense of the lexicons: “God is Spirit,” “God is Love.” Then, to define Love in divine Science we use this phrase for God — divine Principle. By this we mean Mind, a permanent, fundamental, intelligent, divine Being, called in Scripture, Spirit, Love.

It is sometimes said: “God is Love, but this is no argument that Love is God; for God is light, but light is not God.” The first proposition is correct, and is not lost by the conclusion, for Love expresses the nature of God; but the last proposition does not illustrate the first, as light, being matter, loses the nature of God, Spirit, deserts its premise, and expresses God only in metaphor, therefore it is illogical and the conclusion is not properly drawn. It is logical that because God is Love, Love is divine