Tag: Mary Baker Eddy

Posted on

From the Archives: The ‘Fall On The Ice’

By Jeremy, an Ex-Christian Scientist group editor/writer.

Like almost any other religion, Christian Science has its own mythology: those stories that form the core of the faith’s origins, and which often serve to bind its followers together and to the faith, and to validate the faith’s claims. A central story in the anthology of Christian Science myths is what’s often referred to as the ‘Fall On The Ice In Lynn (Massachusetts)’. If you visit the city of Lynn, which is just north of Boston, you can see a memorial plaque at the location at the corner of Market Street and Oxford Street in the downtown area, where our story starts. Anyone who has grown up in, or been in Christian Science for any amount of time knows the story well. This is considered to be the central event that led directly to Mary Baker Eddy’s ‘discovery’ of Christian Science.

A foundational legend of the origins of Christian Science

On February 1, 1866, Eddy was on her way to a Temperance movement meeting in downtown Lynn. She slipped and fell on the ice-covered sidewalk and was transported unconscious to a nearby house, where a doctor was summoned to treat her.

According to Eddy’s account, her condition was beyond the ability of medical practice to help. She claimed that the attending doctor gave her only a few days to live. Somehow, she managed the strength to ask for her Bible and began a deep study of it, focusing her attention particularly on Jesus’s healing of a paralyzed man (Matthew 9:2). Miraculously, after about three days, she had an ‘immediate recovery’:

It was in Massachusetts, in February, 1866. . .that I discovered the Science of divine metaphysical healing which I afterwards named Christian Science.1

From this point on, so the story goes, Eddy sought to understand and ultimately explain this miraculous healing. She claimed an “immediate recovery” from the effects of her injury.

My immediate recovery from the effects of an injury caused by an accident, an injury that neither medicine nor surgery could reach, was the falling apple that led me to the discovery how to be well myself, and how to make others so.2

Some overlooked facts

There is no doubt that Eddy fell on the ice on a cold February evening in Lynn in 1866 and was taken unconscious to a nearby home where she was seen by a local physician. Beyond this, the story starts to take on the traits of a myth. There is fact and truth at its core, but it is shrouded in a blanket of hyperbole and exaggeration. Here are some facts that are ignored or revised in the ‘official’ Christian Science canon:

  1. The injury Eddy suffered was not life-threatening or nearly as serious as claimed by Eddy: Eddy claimed that the attending doctor, Dr. Alvin Cushing, told her that there was no hope for her recovery and that she only had about three days more to live.3 According to Cushing’s own records, consisting of case notes he made at the time he treated Eddy, that is not true. In a sworn affidavit, Cushing, referring to his notes, directly refutes a central part of Eddy’s version of events: “I did not at any time declare, or believe, there was no hope for Mrs. Patterson’s recovery, or that she was in critical condition, and did not at any time say, or believe, that she had but three or any other limited number of days to live.” (sworn affidavit of Dr. Alvin Cushing, January 2, 1907 – Hampden County, Massachusetts).4 Eddy also was treated on at least two subsequent occasions by Cushing following her miraculous three-day recovery, as well as professional visits in August of that year.5
  2. The ‘healing’ may not have been as quick, complete, and/or miraculous as later claimed by Eddy and her followers: just two weeks after her fall in Lynn, Eddy also sought metaphysical treatment from Julius Dresser, a fellow student of Phineas Parkhurst Quimby. In her imploring letter to him, she expressed a feeling quite opposite of what she portrays in her own autobiographical recollection: “Two weeks ago I fell on the sidewalk . . .and was taken up for dead . . . ” She goes on to say, “The physician attending said I had taken the last step I ever should but in two days I got out of my bed alone, and will walk; but yet I confess I am frightened, and out of that nervous heat my friends are forming, spite of me, the terrible spinal affection from which I have suffered so long and hopelessly.”6 Eddy also was treated on at least three subsequent occasions by Cushing following her ‘immediate’ three-day recovery.
  3. Eddy initiated a lawsuit against the City of Lynn in connection to the accident: it is worth noting, as one considers the veracity of Eddy’s claims of the epiphanic nature of this ‘healing’, that she began the process (later rescinded) of suing the city, claiming that the city was responsible for her injuries due to unsafe conditions in the street. In a petition presented to the city in the summer of 1866, she stated that she was seeking damages for “serious personal injuries from which she had little prospect of recovering.“7 (emphasis is mine).
  4. Eddy didn’t cite her 1866 fall and ‘healing’ until years later: Nowhere in her published writings does Eddy describe a ‘fall on the ice’ (it only occurs in her letter to Julius Dresser). Her slim autobiography, Retrospection and Introspection, published in 1891, refers vaguely to “an injury caused by an accident.” (p. 24) She goes on to say that after her recovery she “withdrew from society about three years, — to ponder my mission, to search the Scriptures, to find the Science of Mind that should take the things of God and show them to the creature, and reveal the great curative Principle,–Diety.” (pp. 24-25) If her 1866 accident and miraculous healing had been the revelatory event that led to her ‘discovery’ of Christian Science, one would think she would have mentioned it in her early writings. But the first edition of Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, which appeared in 1875, makes no reference to the event. Only years later, well after the establishment of her church, does she refer to a healing of an injury in 1866. 

Some concluding thoughts

As one who grew up in and practiced Christian Science for 41 years, I took the story of the ‘Fall In Lynn’ as the origin point of my faith. This story was presented as the first and penultimate proof of the effectiveness of Christian Science as a healing agent. Mary Baker Eddy was near death, and she miraculously healed herself, and from that moment on she set about to putting her ‘discovery’ to words and sharing this system of healing with the world. That is the story that I and many others accepted as the whole and complete truth. It is the version that fuels the legend of Christian Science, and gives it its so-called ‘power’.

The facts presented here cast serious doubt on the veracity of Eddy’s and Christian Scientists’ claims regarding this important origin story. Sometimes, memories of events change over time, stories get embellished a bit, and smaller details get lost in the mists of one’s memory. But in this case, it appears that Eddy fashioned this story in later years to create a revelatory myth for the origin of her religion. More than a few biographers, both friendly and critical, have mentioned Eddy’s propensity for shaping the truth to suit her needs.

Many religions have a singular origin moment or series of events that spark their birth. For instance, the Mormons have the story of the tablets containing the Book of Mormon being revealed to Joseph Smith in the woods of upstate New York; for Muslims, it is the 22-year period in which Muhammad received revelations he believed to be from God, which were recorded in the Qur’an. History is replete with many other such stories. Eddy and her followers turned a winter accident that resulted in a serious, but not really life-threatening injury into a virtual raising-of-the-dead myth that led to the discovery of the ‘miraculous’ healing system known as Christian Science.

Footnotes:

1 Eddy, Mary B. G. Retrospection and Introspection. Boston, Massachusetts: The Christian Science Board of Directors, 1892. 24. Print.

2 Ibid.

3 Gill, Gillian. Mary Baker Eddy. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Books, 1998. 162. Print.

4 Milmine, Georgine. The Life of Mary Baker G. Eddy: and the History of Christian Science. New York, New York: Doubleday, Page & Company, 1909. 84-86. Print.

5 Ibid.

6 Gill, p. 158.

7 Ibid.

Related Links:

Mary Baker Eddy (Wikipedia article).

Christian Science (Wikipedia article).

Posted on

Why do Christian Scientists go to the dentist (but not doctors)?

One of the most common questions the Ex-Christian Scientist site gets is “Why do Christian Scientists go to dentists but not doctors?” Yeah, that is a good question. While we were raised in Christian Science, practiced Christian Science, and have since left Christian Science, the “logic” eludes us too, but we’re giving it a try. 

TL;DR

  1. Extreme Christian Scientists often choose not to go to the dentist
  2. Mary Baker Eddy’s reasoning allowed for loopholes to avoid lawsuits and CS taking the blame for failure, you may need to so some mental gymnastics, but as a Christian Scientists, you’re used to that, and you can make it work
  3. Dentistry was a well-established comparatively evidence-based practice in the 1800s.
  4. Mary’s second husband (she had three husbands), Daniel Patterson, was a dentist. They were married in 1853.

1) One is fairly self-explanatory, Extreme Christian Scientists often choose not to go to the dentist, pointing to S&H 167:12 “We cannot serve two masters nor perceive divine Science with the material senses.”

2) “The right use of temporary means” loophole, and other excuses that have been used.  

Depending on how you read Science and Health, you can find loopholes that “allow” for medical treatment. You may need to do some mental gymnastics, but as a Christian Scientists, you’re used to that, and you can make it work. 

If Christian Scientists ever fail to receive aid from other Scientists, – their brethren upon whom they may call, – God will still guide them into the right use of temporary and eternal means S&H p. 444:7-10

Other reasons CS have used: 

  • For routine visits: It is “just” a cleaning, you wash your body, you brush your teeth, going to the dentist for a cleaning is fine.  — Never mind Mary Baker Eddy repeatedly rails on about hygiene being ineffective: “Drugs and hygiene cannot successfully usurp the place and power of the diving source of health and perfection.” S&H p.167 12-14
  • Having teeth removed, repaired and replaced is acceptable, as teeth are bones, and “Until the advancing age admits the efficacy an supremacy of Mind, it is better for Christian Scientists to leave surgery and the adjustment of broken bones and dislocations to the fingers of a surgeon, while the mental healer confines himself chiefly to mental reconstruction an to the prevention of inflammation.” S&H p. 401 27-32 This excuse is often also used to deny numbing during procedures, or follow-up pain relief and antibiotics, as “you can pray about that part.” Pro tip: if you can’t “pray enough” to fix the tooth, don’t try and pray about the pain. 
  • Using braces on teeth is fine as they are “aids” to “assist” us until we reach a higher level of understanding & are better able to heal ourselves. S&H 56 3-6 “Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness,” Jesus’ concessions (in certain cases) to material methods were for the advancement of spiritual good.” (Yes, we know this is from the chapter on Marriage, but it applies to so many things). 
  • Ms. Eddy is known to have used dentists in her time, if it was OK for her, it is OK for current-day Christian Scientists. 
  • As of 2010, The Mother Church has openly encouraged the notion that Christian Science has made a “Truce” with doctors (NYTimes, March 23, 2010) and medical care (including dentistry) is acceptable. 

3) Dentistry was a well-established comparatively evidence-based practice in the 1800s.

Per the American Dental Education Association website: 

“By the 1700s, dentistry had become a more defined profession.  In 1723, Pierre Fauchard, a French surgeon credited as the Father of Modern Dentistry, published his influential book, The Surgeon Dentist, a Treatise on Teeth, which for the first time defined a comprehensive system for caring for and treating teeth.  Additionally, Fauchard first introduced the idea of dental fillings and the use of dental prosthesis, and he identified that acids from sugar led to tooth decay.” (https://www.adea.org/GoDental/Health_Professions_Advisors/History_of_Dentistry.aspx) 

For more about Pierre Fauchard, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Fauchard, https://www.fauchard.org/publications/47-who-is-pierre-fauchard

By Mary Baker Eddy’s day, dental practices had been around for well over 100 years, and were far more evidence-based than the questionable notions of humors being used by doctors of the day (see additional resources). 

4) MBE’s second husband, Daniel Patterson, was a dentist, so dentists must be OK?

They were married in 1853. It does not sound like a particularly happy marriage, as they spent much of their time separated. It ended with a divorce in 1873.

Final Thoughts

It is worth noting that while MBE is quite set against mesmerism, hypnotism, homeopathy, drugs, hygiene, minor curatives, material medicine, chemists, botanists, druggists, doctors, nurses, vegetarianism, hydrotherapy, narcotics, cataplasms, whiskey, apothecaries, man-midwifes, and material hygiene to name a few. Interestingly, dentists don’t get an obvious mention, leaving them open as a possible acceptable option for Christian Scientists to partake in.

Additional Resources 

Christian Science in Historical Context – Further Reading 

History of Dentistry – Further Reading 

19th Century Medicine – further reading 

Christian Science Links – Science & Health in full text as a searchable PDF https://christiansciencemedia.org/files/2010/03/Science-and-Health-with-Key-to-the-Scriptures.pdf

Posted on

Coverups, Conspiracies & “Colonel” Glover

Everyone in the year 2020 has experience living through a global pandemic. We have all seen first hand how the corona virus and the fear of covid-19 have dominated the news and reshaped our lives. Our personal experiences living in the age of the corona virus might help us to put into context a long accepted claim by Mary Baker Eddy that her husband died as a result of a yellow fever epidemic.

Young Mary had only been married six months and was pregnant with their son when her husband George Glover died. In later years Mary Baker Eddy would refer to her first husband as Major Glover or, later on, as Colonel Glover.[1] He died June 27, 1844, just days after Mary Baker Glover wrote toasts demonizing the moderate Whigs and praising pro-slavery southern Democrats. Most biographies of Mrs. Eddy repeat her assertion that her first husband died of yellow fever. Sibyl Wilbur, who worked with Mary Baker Eddy in writing the first positive biography, breathlessly describes the scene: “In Wilmington they [George and Mary] found yellow fever raging and the city in a panic. Mr. Glover endeavored to forward his business for a speedy departure; but he was himself suddenly stricken with the fever and survived but nine days.”[2] Early Christian Science historian William Lyman Johnson describes “the harrowing scenes of suffering she witnessed during this epidemic.”[3] Former Christian Science Monitor editor Richard Nenneman claims, more soberly, in his biography, “Wilmington was having an epidemic of yellow fever, and George became ill with the disease.”[4] Even some of the most critical biographies of the Leader of Christian Science accept the claim that her first husband, Mr. Glover, died of yellow fever in Wilmington, North Carolina in June 1844. But they haven’t necessarily done the checking.

When I lived in North Carolina I had the opportunity to do a little research on this period in Mrs. Eddy’s life and North Carolina history. There was an outbreak of yellow fever in Wilmington in 1821, and then not another outbreak of yellow fever until the outbreak in 1862 that lasted for several months and killed hundreds of people in a city of less than 10,000. If there was a raging epidemic of yellow fever in 1844 which panicked the city, it did not produce enough of a panic to make it into the newspapers and histories of Wilmington. You don’t have to go to the libraries, historical societies, and museums of North Carolina and spend hours researching the subject. A simple Google search of yellow fever in Wilmington will bring up a number of articles about the devastating outbreak of 1862. If you refine the Google search to include a search for yellow fever in Wilmington in 1844 you will either be taken to articles referencing the 1862 outbreak (with 1844 omitted) or you will be taken to stories about the death of George Glover. Perhaps there was a raging epidemic of yellow fever causing widespread scenes of great suffering and the only record we have of the epidemic is the account of George Glover’s death (perhaps he was the sole victim) as recounted by Mary Baker Eddy decades later.

 Yellow fever was certainly a highly feared disease at the time, and so the claim that her husband died of yellow fever amidst a panic-inducing outbreak was certainly a far more sensationalized story than the cause of death given for George Glover in all the newspapers at the time, bilious fever. Bilious fever is associated with excessive bile in the blood stream, leading to jaundice, or a yellow skin tone. The claim that her husband died amidst a highly feared epidemic is far more sensational than the idea that he died from bile entering his blood stream.

The critical Bates-Dittemore biography treats the issue well.

“In the early part of June, Glover was suddenly overcome by a severe attack of bilious fever. He struggled gallantly against it for eleven or twelve days but succumbed on June 27.

“Mrs. Eddy always insisted that her first husband died, more dramatically, during an epidemic of yellow fever. But there was no epidemic of yellow fever recorded in Wilmington that year. Had there been such an epidemic, the public funeral which Glover received would hardly have been permitted. The Wilmington Chronicle, the New Hampshire Patriot, and the Masonic Magazine all attributed his death to billious fever.

“Accepting the yellow-fever myth, Miss Wilbur consistently elaborated it by the statement: ‘During his illness his young wife was excluded by his brother Masons from the perilous task of nursing him’ (p. 39). This is contradicted by Mrs. Glover’s letter to George Sullivan Baker, January 22, 1848. [In that letter, she says ‘day and night I watched alone by the couch of death.’[5]]

“In her ‘Reply to McClure’s Magazine,’ Miscellany, page 312, Mrs. Eddy gave ‘about nine days’ as the duration of Glover’s illness; the obituaries gave twelve, corrected in Mrs. Eddy’s scrapbook to eleven. The last is most probably correct.”[6]

According to Robert Peel: “The contemporary accounts all describe the disease as ‘bilious fever.’ Mrs. Eddy’s explanation was that the authorities wished to cover up the fact that the dreaded yellow fever had appeared.”[7] Perhaps this cover-up was so thorough that although the city was allegedly in a panic due to the alleged raging yellow fever epidemic and consequent harrowing scenes of death and suffering, those covering it up were able to suppress all newspaper accounts and historical records of the outbreak. This claim of a conspiracy is a consistent pattern throughout Mrs. Eddy’s life. While it is certainly possible that George Glover died of yellow fever, and it is certainly possible (though quite implausible) that there was a conspiracy to cover up a yellow fever epidemic, if so then this would be one of a very long line of conspiracies connected to what must arguably be the most conspired-against woman in history.

It may be that Mary Baker Eddy’s claims of a yellow fever epidemic and a subsequent massive cover-up of an unheard of scale are true. But for all of us who have lived through the corona virus pandemic of 2020, we know how it has shaped our lives and how it has been a central part of the news for months. The idea that there was a massive coverup that was able to suppress all news and historical accounts of an epidemic in 1844 (but not in 1821 or 1862) strains credulity. Or perhaps it is possible that George Glover died due to bilious fever, as all the contemporary accounts confirm, and yet in the retelling many decades later Mary Baker Eddy felt the need to attribute his already tragic death to a vastly more sensational yellow fever epidemic, of which there is no evidence beyond her own statements.

Tanner Johnsrud was a fifth generation Christian Scientist and a Journal-listed practitioner for over a decade. He and his wife left Christian Science in 2017 and became Christians. He is currently working on a book on the development of Mary Baker Eddy’s teaching and claims about herself.

[1] Whether or not he ever earned the title of Colonel, or whether Mrs. Eddy later referred to him as Colonel Glover is another matter.

[2] Sibyl Wilbur, p. 41

[3] William Lyman Johnson History of Christian Science Volume 3. p. 304

Johnson, the son of the Clerk of The Mother Church writes “[Mary] was married to George Washington Glover, December 12, 1843. Six months later, her husband passed away in Wilmington, Delaware [sic]. Mrs. Glover returned to her father’s home in Tilton, New Hampshire, and in the following September a son was born, whom she named after his father. The shock of her husband’s illness and death from yellow fever, the harrowing scenes of suffering she witnessed during this epidemic, ant eh coming of a fatherless child, brought about an illness which for a time looked very serious. She was not able to nurse her son, and he was nursed by a Mrs. Morrison, who had given birth to twins a few days previous to the birth of this boy.” pp. 304-305

[4] Nenneman, p. 43

[5] Mary Baker Eddy Library Accession F00035. Quoted in In My True Light and Life, p. 54.

[6]The Truth and the Tradition – Bates Dittemore biography, p. 36

[7] Peel, Vol. 1 p. 322 n. 138

Posted on

Esoteric Christian Science: MBE as the Woman in Revelation

This post covers a lesser-known topic, the idea of Mary Baker Eddy as the Woman in Revelation. Until I started researching Christian Science, MBE and the colorful, often forgotten history of CS, I had never heard of this theory, neither had anyone else on the ExCS Admin Team. The theological debate is less interesting than the drama and intrigue that surrounded some of these decisions and official statements. For those interested in further reading on the issue, there are extensive links — all of them work as of the time of publication. 

This post previously appeared on kindism.org, and has been reprinted with slight modifications and updates to external sources. 

In April, 1938, a six-member committee of editors and former editors of CS periodicals was assembled “to discover just what Mrs. Eddy believed concerning herself with respect to Scriptural prophecy.” The committee was given access to Mrs. Eddy’s private correspondence, and published writings. After five years and 57 typewritten pages, the Board of Directors published a statement Mrs. Eddy regarded herself as having fulfilled Bible prophecy in the July 1943 issue of the Christian Science Journal. (1)

I am not an expert on the Book of Revelation, Ms. Eddy’s views, or the finer points of the controversy that followed the Board’s 1943 decision to announce to the world Ms. Eddy’s place in Scriptural prophecy. I was never taught about Ms. Eddy’s views on the topic, and the book of Revelation was not mentioned much in my Sunday School classes. I was only vaguely aware of any controversy in the 1990s over TMC’s media empire and the Bliss Knapp book, and had only read little bits here and there in very unauthorized literature.

Did Ms. Eddy consider herself to be the woman in Revelation? In Science & Health she has an entire chapter dedicated to the Apocalypse, and she tells the reader,

Mortals, obey the heavenly evangel. Take divine Science. Read this book from beginning to end. Study it, ponder it.   (emphasis mine)

I don’t think it is too much of a leap to read “divine Science” and “this book” as referring to Science & Health. As for any blatant statement that she is the woman in Revelation, to the best of my knowledge she never makes such a statement in S&H (2).

Bliss Knapp is one of the better known perpetrators of this idea. His foundation has made extended documentation available to substantiate these views. The main one, titled Historical Facts Regarding Mary Baker Eddy’s Student, Bliss Knapp, has extensive citations from Miscellaneous Writings. On page 15 of these Historical Facts the heading of Fulfillment of Prophecy is discussed:

  • The Destiny of The Mother Church places on record our Leader’s spiritual life story and how she fulfills Bible prophecy. It has also brought out into the open the division in teaching about our Leader which began at the time of the Woodbury trial. After the trial, one group of teachers took Mrs. Eddy’s statement quite literally that ” … a little white-haired, old lady couldn’t be the woman in the Apocalypse.” (3) In this line of teaching, she was just Mark Baker’s daughter who had an unusual spiritual gift. However, her own faithful students accepted her as God’s chosen Messenger bringing the promised Comforter, — the woman with the leaven foretold by Jesus and spiritually identified with his prophecy to John. (Mrs. Eddy refers to 15 Jesus’ parable of the leaven in Science and Health page 117:29 and also in Miscellaneous Writings page 174:30.)

So where does that leave us today? Official Church Doctrine – at least as I was taught it, does not mention Ms. Eddy as the woman in Revelation. A few of my Sunday School teachers mentioned that the second coming of Christ had occurred, and was embodied in Christian Science, but they never really elaborated on these ideas.

I don’t really have an opinion on Ms. Eddy’s place as the woman in Revelation but the intrigue and infighting among the church makes for interesting reading.

Bible Resources on Revelation

Books & News paper articles which deal with the issue on some level

Destiny of the Mother Church Controversy & Financial Crisis

  1. http://www.endtime.org/2ndcoming/2ndcoming.html, I am still looking for the actual CSJournal article
  2. I may be wrong about this, please let me know if I am and send the citation!
  3. On p. 8 of Historical Facts “Ira Knapp had explained to his family, that he could not say in court that she was the woman in the Apocalypse, because he knew of Mrs. Woodbury’s intent to bring Mrs. Eddy into court to make her publicly declare she was “the Woman”. This would not have been acceptable to other Christians at that time.” No kidding.
Posted on

Free Masons

A collection of references discussing the Masonic connections of Mary Baker Eddy and Christian Science.

If you’re looking for a great conspiracy theory, look no further, Mary Baker Eddy and her Masonic Connections! The Free Masons are behind many great conspiracy theories so it comes as no surprise that Ms. Eddy herself was involved with them!

Like in most things esoteric we find there is Freemasonry involvement. Like the fact one of the most important New Thought organisations Christian Science uses the symbol of the crown and the cross. Which is also a Freemasonry symbol. The crown also has five points on it. So if it was laid out flat it would be a five pointed star or Pentagram. As previously explained the Pentagram is associated with the Rose, so it is sort of Rosy Cross symbol, as used by the Rosicrucians. The cross also goes through the crown showing a obvious sexual association. Though it is also a symbol of unity of making the masculine and feminine One. Christian Science was also the first Christian sect to put forward the concept of a Father and Mother god and so help to bring back the Goddess. It was also the first Christian Sect to be started and led solely by a woman, Mary Baker Eddy. Her first husband Colonel George Washington Glover was a Freemason. She had some of her writings published in “Freemason’s Monthly Magazine” and many early Christian Scientists leaders under Mary Baker Eddy were also Freemasons.  via Freemasonry and the hidden Goddess

 

Mary Baker Eddy discussing the Free Masons in The First Church of Christ, Scientist, and Miscellany Chapter XIX [The Christian Science Journal] A Memorable Coincidence and Historical Facts 

Dear Editor: — I send for publication in our periodicals the following deeply interesting letter from Elizabeth Earl Jones of Asheville, N. C., — the State where my husband, Major George W. Glover, passed on and up, the State that so signally honored his memory, where with wet eyes the Free Masons laid on his bier the emblems of a master Mason, and in long procession with tender dirge bore his remains to their last resting-place. Deeply grateful, I recognize the divine hand in turning the hearts of the noble 327Southrons of North Carolina legally to protect the practice of Christian Science in that State.
Is it not a memorable coincidence that, in the Court of New Hampshire, my native State, and in the Legislature of North Carolina, they have the same year, in 1903, made it legal to practise Christian Science in these States?
MARY BAKER EDDY
PLEASANT VIEW, CONCORD, N. H.
October 16, 1903

Eddy’s response to the McClure’s Magazine features via The Truth about Mary Baker Eddy

Regarding my first marriage and the tragic death of my husband, McClure’s Magazine says: “He [George Washington Glover] took his bride to Wilmington, South Carolina, and in June, 1844, six months after his marriage, he died of yellow fever. He left his young wife in a miserable plight. She was far from home and entirely without money or friends. Glover, however, was a Free Mason, and thus received a decent burial. The Masons also paid Mrs. Glover’s fare to New York City, where she was met and taken to her father’s home by her brother George. . . . Her position was an embarrassing one. She was a grown woman, with a child, but entirely without means of support. . . . Mrs. Glover made only one effort at self-support. For a brief season she taught school.”

My first husband, Major George W. Glover, resided in Charleston, S. C. While on a business trip to Wilmington, N. C., he was suddenly seized with yellow fever and died in about nine days. I was with him on this trip. He took with him the usual amount of money he would need on such an excursion. At his decease I was surrounded by friends, and their provisions in my behalf were most tender. The Governor of the State and his staff, with a long procession, followed the remains of my beloved one to the cemetery. The Free Masons selected my escort, who took me to my father’s home in Tilton, N. H. My salary for writing gave me ample support. I did open an infant school, but it was for the purpose of starting that educational system in New Hampshire. [emphasis added]

From an excerpt of “En Route to Global Occupation” by Gary H. Kah, published by Huntington House. 

Freemasonry experienced tremendous growth during the nineteenth century, particularly during the second half of the century when Freemasonry flourished as never before. This was also a time of rapid growth for Masonically-inspired religious cults. In addition to founding the Theosophical Society, Freemasonry participated in the rise and spread of Christian Science and Unitarianism; and Masons Rutherford and Russell founded the Jehovah’s Witnesses. [emphasis added]

Further Reading: