five; so is it in regard to evil. As all virtue is simply a participation of the divine mind so all vice is simply a privation of the divine mind.
Mrs. Eddy says: “This is the nature of error. The mark of ignorance is on its forehead.”[1] The point is that error is a not-knowing. In so far as we fail to know or have partial knowledge we err or sin. She says: “Material sense defines all things materially, and has a finite sense of the infinite.”[2] Material sense is erring sinful sense, and this has a limited sense of the infinite or of God. For Mrs. Eddy this is the same as defining error or sin as a partial view of the universe. She says again: “Limitations are put off in proportion as the fleshly nature disappears.”[3] This is equal to saying that a material or sinful sense of things is a limited or partial sense of things, for we are limited only by our beliefs or mortal thoughts.
The Neoplatonists theorize in the same fine fashion. Plotinus says: “He, therefore, who by a survey of the parts blames the whole, blames foolishly and without a cause; since it is necessary, as well by comparing the parts with the whole, to consider whether they accord, and are accommodated to the whole.”[4] The thought is that when we consider nature in its entirety and as under the “form of eternity” there is no defect or sin. The notion of something being wrong re-
