ter explanation is, however, that pictures in our time may become a lucrative commercial commodity. Plotinus, I judge, was not so tempted. What's the harm anyway in swapping one shadow for another, especially when one is willing to give more than he gets of the article? There is nothing, you see, in either parting with or receiving what is unreal. A very convenient philosophy Christian Science is! What consistency in inconsistency!
The digression that we have indulged in is justifiable on the ground that it brings into clear view the radical character of Christian Science principles and Mrs. Eddy's arbitrary and limited application of them. Christian Scientists, as is well known, live changed lives both for the better and for the worse. But the reforms that they practice are not half so radical and revolutionary as the system really demands. It demands with as inexorable logic as can fetter human thought that they eat nothing, see nothing, hear nothing, feel nothing, in short that they be rid of their bodies immediately and with the swiftest possible dispatch. Mrs. Eddy has carried her principles into absurdities from some of which common sense restrained the Neoplatonists. And her common sense, too, permitted her to follow her principles into only a few of the follies into which they lead those who do not know when to slip the halter from their heads. Practical Christian Scientists keep their hands on the buckle and refuse to go where it is unpleasant or dangerous. I take the liberty to suggest that they make much
