Phineas P. Quimby, the Bible and Healing

President's Editorial

Robert Winterhalter

Phineas P. Quimby, the Bible and Healing

In the field of New Thought, Phineas P. Quimby has been a shadowy figure. Living and working in the mid-nineteenth century, he is regarded by many people as the founder of the New Thought movement. This is because he was the first, at least in modern times, to teach its principles and to apply these same principles in healing the sick.

Others, however, would deny him the honor as founder because he established no church or school, and left no organization behind him. In their view, Emma Curtis Hopkins, who began the process of organization, is the better choice. I will not decide this issue directly, but I will make a few observations.

First of all, while Quimby is known for the obscurity of his language, the same can be said of Hopkins, and to the same degree. The fact is that in any effort to discuss infinity, we are all challenged. Lao Tse is reported to have said, "The word that can be uttered is not the eternal Word." The only sense in which we can "utter" the eternal Word is not by voice, but by consciously being what we are, inherently, as God's Idea in mind and in action. It is, of course, true that the ministry of preaching the Word is holy-indeed, how could it be otherwise? Yet even the Bible is word about the Word of God.

Second, the stature of both Quimby and Hopkins, as scientists of the Spirit, must not be evaluated on the basis of their words alone, but also, and equally, by their works. Both Quimby and Hopkins were effective in their ability to demonstrate their understanding in a healing capacity. To draw an analogy, Thomas Edison's stature as a scientist cannot be evaluated on the basis of his words alone, which were not especially noteworthy. His practical inventions, such as the electric light and the phonograph, as well as numerous others, must also be taken into account.

Third, while it is well documented that Hopkins took a stand on progressive issues of the times, so did Quimby in his somewhat earlier times, and to the same degree. Hopkins was noteworthy as a champion of women's suffrage and other goals of early feminism. Quimby, as the manuscripts prove, was equally noteworthy in his support for the preservation of the Federal Union, the defeat of the Southern landed aristocracy, the freeing of the slaves, and the proposition that races and genders are equal in the Mind of God.

Fourth, the fact that Quimby founded no church, center, or school, and left no organization behind him, does not disqualify him as the founder. It has never been disputed, within the New Thought movement itself, that the movement contains the seeds of its own transcendence. That is to say, paradoxically, that the very purpose of establishing churches, centers, schools, and organizations is to produce an outcome where these institutions are no longer necessary. When the last disease has been healed, the last empty pocketbook is filled to overflowing, the last discordant relationship is harmonized, the last addiction is dissolved, and the last weapon is relegated to a museum, who will need an organization? Perhaps people will still meet together at set times and places to celebrate the good and the true, as they do now. There will, however, be no need for professional ministers, teachers, counselors, or practitioners.

It is true, of course, that Quimby's formal education was limited, and his terminology is unusual in certain respects. This has made him less accessible to many readers. The Bible, however, is so much an expression of the human psyche, in all its awesome richness, that we can tell a great deal about a person's inner qualities by exploring how he or she uses it. This does not deny the inspiration of scripture, but affirms it. And, by exploring Quimby's Bible commentaries, we can gain far greater insight into this remarkable man's character and consciousness.

From a historical perspective and as a literary composite, the New Testament emerged out of the early centuries of the Church. One way that Quimby is unusual is in the vehemence with which he uses the Bible to attack the Church of his era, because of its lack of spiritual vitality, and its failure to bring healing into people's minds, bodies, and everyday lives. This is not, however, unlike Martin Luther's efforts to use the Bible as a way of attacking the idolatries of the Church and of working to restore its spiritual vitality.

It is, nevertheless, unusual that Quimby uses the Bible to vehemently attack the practices of three professions: the clergy, the physician, and the politician. Quimby uses the term "priests," but to refer to Protestant ministers, who would deny that they are priests. He rarely mentions the Roman Catholic Church, whose clergy are actually priests and with whom he had very little contact. His rare contacts with Catholics, if any, would have been in Boston among a largely immigrant element of the population. When he writes of the Church he is referring to fellow Yankees, specifically to Calvinists of his era, whom he knew first­hand. He took the Church as he found it in his own time and place. That time, as already noted, was the mid-19th century. That place was upper New England. As to the churches of Europe and of newly settled lands to the west, he is silent.

His attack on the medical profession is strong and unrelenting. We must recognize, in all fairness, that the medical field of his era was rudimentary compared to modern standards. In more recent times, also, there have been genuine efforts by a growing minority of medical doctors to involve spiritual and emotional factors in the healing process. In the main, however, the medical field still tends to be materialistic.

There is all too little effort to deal with the origin of disease within the belief system of the individual. There is all too much of an emphasis on trying to eradicate, or to control, the physical symptoms of disease by purely external methods. In short, Quimby struck at the root of disease, whereas, to this day, most physicians of the regular school are content merely to hack away at the branches.

Quimby is also vehement in attacking the politicians of his era. Yet he is not really cynical in his outlook. He writes favorably of Abraham Lincoln, totally supporting the Union cause during the Civil War, and correctly predicting (in the early 1860s) an early end of slavery in the United States.

In evaluating Quimby's writings, including those that quote the Bible, there are a few basic axioms that it is well to apply. The first, and the most important, is to let Quimby be Quimby. Ervin Seale, Alan Anderson, and Herman J. Aaftink, along with others of the Quimby Foundation, did a superior work of scholarship in compiling his complete writings, and arranging for their publication in book form. Accuracy was their first concern. In the same spirit, no attempt should be made to soften Quimby's arguments.

The second axiom is to accept, as factual, Quimby's statements about his healing practice, and also his experiences with out-of-body travel. These reports are entirely credible in terms of my own experience and that of many other people. This second axiom must stand unless and until some other scholar, in covering the same material, succeeds in showing greater insight into Quimby's character by denying either his healing practice, or his out-of-body travels, or both.

The third axiom is to be mindful of the legitimate findings of modern biblical scholarship. This includes, but is not limited to, recognizing the limitations of the King James translation of the Bible, which to Quimby was the Bible. In doing so, however, one should avoid being overly harsh in identifying historical errors that he makes, or in expecting a higher level of historical scholarship than is reasonable for a person of his times and limited formal education.

The fourth axiom is to be reasonably thorough. A cursory or superficial view will not suffice. That is, consider the whole body of evidence from all three volumes of his writings. Genuine scholarship requires an ability to see the big picture, and also an ability to pay close attention to details.

A surprising finding, from my own perspective, is not that Quimby makes so many historical errors, but that he makes so few, given the limitations of his schooling. Also, given his importance as a spiritual pioneer, including his work in pointing to deeper levels of meaning in the Scriptures, I am inclined to be more lenient regarding his limitations as a historian.

It is certainly the case that studying Quimby's own use of the Bible gives us a uniquely insightful way of understanding his character and the integrity of his actions. He is no longer a mysterious character, but one with whom we can more easily relate as one person to another. He was a man of a given time and place, and must be reviewed in his historical context. Paradoxically, however, he transcends his time and place by being a vehicle of eternal verities in his life and work. It is not a distortion to maintain that we are his true contemporaries.

Also, Quimby's ways of using the Bible have a surprising capacity to evoke the deepest convictions of the reader with respect to the life of the spirit. He alerts us, to the point of bluntness, to the main shortcomings of the traditional churches. To the same extent, however, he inspires deep insights as to what the churches can become when their leaders and members are open to the inspiration of the Divine Wisdom, which, increasingly over the years, became the core of Quimby's own consciousness.

It should be noted that some of Quimby's significant commentaries, with respect to the Bible, are made regarding political issues. These particular writings call for maintaining the integrity of the Union and freeing the slaves. He lived and worked during an era when some of the basic defining events of American history took place. And, he came down firmly and unequivocally on the side of what I view as right and true, at a time when the issues were confused and the outcome was in doubt.

Finally, we must decide for ourselves whether Quimby's central claim is valid, namely, that he used the same principle as Jesus in healing the sick, especially after he abandoned his earlier career as a mesmerist, and moved on to a more enlightened practice. He summarized his challenge to the traditional Church as follows:

Now when I can show that I can produce a phenomenon that to all appearances is just like some produced by Christ and on the living who can speak for themselves, I should like to know by what authority anyone dares to say that it is not done in the same way that Christ did His works. If they cannot tell how I do it, or how He did, how do they know but that it is done in the same way? Their only objection can be that it happens to be contrary to their own opinion, which is not worth anything and they admit it, for they will say that it is a miracle to them.1

Turning now to specific Bible passages, we find only brief references by Quimby to the historical books of the Old Testament. He does mention Joshua, not as a political and military leader, but as one who led his people out of error and into truth. "When Joshua showed the absurdities of the people's theory, they left it and followed him, so the magicians and sorcerers and all such deceivers had to fall back for the true science."2

Quimby had investigated the spiritualism of his era, and he was skeptical of claims of contact, through mediumship, with persons on "the other side." That is to say, on such matters he would rather err on the side of skepticism than on the side of credulity. In I Samuel 28, Saul, the first King of the Israelites is perplexed as to what action to take as a military leader, and he goes in disguise to the "witch of Endor." Quimby correctly identifies her as a medium. Mediumship, however interpreted, was widely practiced in the ancient Near East, and was already an ancient practice 3000 years ago. Saul had decreed a law against it in Israel, and he now broke his own law in going to this medium, seeking in vain for help.3

According to I Kings 19:11-12, Elijah experienced God not through earthquake, wind and fire, but as "a still, small voice." Quimby's disgust is apparent when he declares: "Politics is like the wind and the medical faculty the thunder, and when both have exhausted themselves, then out of the clamor of war and the scene of carnage, the effect of false religion, rises the still small voice of science."4

In his essay, "Disease Traced to the early Ages and Its Causes - Religion," Quimby refers to three accounts of disease in II Kings, Chapter 5, and II Chronicles, Chapters 16 and 26. In II Kings 5, Naaman, head of the Syrian army, is healed of leprosy. Quimby's comment is brief: "Elisha without prescribing any medicine told the man to wash in the Jordan seven times and he was healed"5 (emphasis added).

II Chronicles 16:12-13 reflects the negative attitude that the early Hebrews held toward physicians, and Quimby is correct in stating this historical conclusion.6 "Asa in the thirty and ninth year of his reign was diseased in his feet, until his disease was exceeding great: Yet in his disease, he sought not to the Lord, but to the physicians, and Asa slept with his fathers, and died in the one and fortieth year of his reign."

In II Chronicles 26, King Uzziah tries to usurp the High Priest by offering incense in the temple. In ancient Judah the king, the high priest, and the prophets all had their well-defined roles, and were not allowed to infringe on the others. Becoming angry with the temple priests when he was opposed in this activity, Uzziah contracted leprosy, and was never healed of it. According to Quimby, "This was a case where temper threw his system into a state to be affected by his belief."7 Whether this conclusion is correct, or not, what is significant here is that he is reasoning by analogy from his own experience as a healing practitioner. Here is a vital clue to ascertaining what is correct and original in the healing records in Scripture, wherever they are found.

Earlier, I mentioned that New Thought as an organized movement contains the seeds of its own transcendence. The prophet Jeremiah, in Jeremiah 31:31-34, affirms in the same spirit that God will put His law within us and write it in our hearts, and that we shall all know Him directly and no longer need to teach others about God. Quimby's allusions to this passage show how congenial he finds it to be. He comments:

As disease is a belief, it has never entered into their minds or senses that their belief is the cause of their trouble. Let this be made plain to the people and then they will not say to one another, Know you this Truth! But it will be so plain that any person of ordinary ability can see it. These beliefs will give way to Science and superstition and bigotry will be driven out of the minds of men and the Bible will stand on the rock of Science.8

Then one shall not say to another, Know you the truth, but all shall know it from the least to the greatest. Then disease shall be destroyed and truth shall reign all in all.9

Let us now turn to Jesus' healing work, as interpreted by Quimby in specific references to the canonical Gospels. There is a need here to consider how one Biblical author may have used and adapted material from another Biblical author. In reviewing the Gospels, we find that the authors of Matthew and Luke drew upon the Gospel of Mark as a major source, but not necessarily from the same version of Mark. Also, we find that the Gospel of John represents early traditions that are largely apart from those of the other three canonical Gospels.

A thorough review of Quimby's commentaries shows that he made far greater use of the Gospel of Matthew than he did of Mark and Luke. The Gospel of Matthew has many advantages as a source for Jesus' teachings, and as such it deserves our highest respect. There is also a disadvantage, however, in that Matthew is further removed from the actual healing events than is Mark. Also, the author of Matthew held to the view that Jesus was 100 percent effective as a healer, whereas Mark showed that his success rate was somewhat less than 100 percent.

For example, when Jesus returns to his hometown, Nazareth, in Mark, it is said that "He could there do no mighty work save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them. And he marveled because of their unbelief" (Mark 6:5-6). The author of Matthew revised this to read, "He did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief" (Matthew 13:58, emphasis added).

Mark, then, shows Jesus more candidly in terms of his practical challenges than the author of Matthew, and also records far more information from which Quimby could have drawn analogies to his own experience in the healing field, had he scrutinized Mark more closely. What we find, in Matthew, are both a tendency to edit out and a tendency to interpolate. In the editing out process, he is indiscriminate in his manner of omitting information that is valuable from a healing standpoint. In his work of interpolation, he sometimes adds statements from other contexts, in order to make a theological point.

Nevertheless, it is for us to study the healing records for ourselves, and to draw both from our own experience and from modern scholarship in doing so. This is what Quimby would want us to do. And, while his own comments regarding the records of Jesus' healing work are brief, they are substantial. He is, in fact, vitally interested in how the New Testament applies to healing, and even ventures the view that "The New Testament applies more particularly to the sick."10

There are those who claim that Jesus healed what are called "functional" illnesses, but not "organic" ones. No such distinction is found in Scripture. Using the terminology of his era, Quimby writes in agreement with Scripture: "I shall speak of two kinds of disease. One is called by the doctors, local and the other, nervous. In my way I make no difference as far as the effect of the mind is concerned. Nervous disease is the effect of... opinion reduced to a belief, and so are all others."11

In alluding to the healing of a leper (Matthew 8:1-4, Mark 1:40-45, Luke 5:12-16), Quimby explains that in some cases, to try to explain the scientific basis of a healing would be futile. He contrasts himself with spiritualistic healers, noting that though he and they appear to some observers to be the same, there is nevertheless a vital difference. That is to say, Quimby understands the underlying principle behind healing, whereas the spiritualists and their patients merely attribute their healings to the spirits. He states: "This was the difficulty with Jesus [i.e., he notes correctly that there were also would-be spiritualist healers in Jesus' era], and he told those whom he cured to show themselves to the High Priest and rulers but say nothing."12

The Centurion's Servant (Matthew 8:5-13, Luke 7:2-10) is a case of distant healing. That Quimby is drawing upon Matthew's version, rather than the more accurate one in Luke, is seen in his statement that the centurion came to Jesus and spoke with him directly (along with other details). This occurs only in Matthew's version, not in Luke's, where the centurion first sends Jewish elders to talk to Jesus, and later sends some of his friends.

Quimby, however, draws an essential analogy here. From the standpoint of effective treatment, it does not really matter whether the centurion came to Jesus directly, or sent others as his agents. Quimby notes: "When the centurion came to Jesus to tell him that his servant was sick, Jesus was not aware of the fact but immediately became subject to his clairvoyant state, saw the servant and administered unto him. Then he said to the centurion, `Go thy way, and according to thy faith so it shall be unto thee.' So the centurion left and the servant was healed in the selfsame hour. Now this is as plain to me as any cure I ever performed. This was not a power but a higher wisdom that the world knows not of. I will now introduce myself, showing that I cure in the same way."13

In commenting on the healing of Peter's mother-in-law (Matthew 8:14-15, Mark 1:29-31, Luke 4:38-39), the main point Quimby makes is that there is not some mysterious power at work, but a principle that can be understood and applied. "This principle which you ignorantly worship, this I declare unto you by explaining it."14

Matthew's truncated version of the swine miracle (found in Matthew 8:28-34, Mark 5:1-20, Luke 8:26-39) has little to recommend it, and Quimby's allusions to this event refer only to the drowning of the pigs. The essay in question deals more with politics than with healing. In it, the Dred Scott decision is roundly criticized, with the observation that "The people are not bound by that decision, for it is the opinion of a majority of judges and they are not supreme law. The people are the law and the judges its expounders."15 Perhaps he had heard of Abraham Lincoln's observation that "The people are the masters of congresses and courts." As to most politicians of his era, Quimby remarks: "To understand the signs of the times so that you may not be deceived by specious appearances, you must test each opinion by the standard of science. Ask how they know and you will see them squirm and gnash their teeth. Then in a fit of rage they will leave you and enter the swine of their old superstition and are lost to the world."16

Regarding the healing of the woman with an issue of blood (Matthew 9:20-22, Mark 5:25-34, Luke 8:43-48), Quimby explains that although to the woman her healing was a mere act of power, it was actually far more than that:

Now to the woman, here was a cure by power; but when he cured by the power of the Holy Ghost, then he explained the fact, or it was no more than any other cure. So the Holy Ghost is the science or language that conveys the idea to the sick or associates the word with the thing. This was heaven and happiness. I will illustrate. I call on the sick; I sit down and receive from the patient their thoughts, not their language but their feelings. These to me are wisdom for I can tell what the cause is or what makes them, for sensation contains the substance of the idea. I know the idea by the sensation just as a person knows an orange by the odor.17

When commenting on the restoration of a man's withered hand (Matthew 12:9-14, Mark 3:1-6, Luke 6:6-11), Quimby paints a contrast between the true Christian - which he found hard to find - and the "natural man," as he translates one of Paul's metaphors. "So religion is that wisdom that can say to the sick and palsied man, `Stretch forth thy hand and I will apply the Science of Christ and restore it.' Here is the difference. The natural man knows not Science or Christ. To know Science, you must be born of the spirit of religion or truth, but to be a quack is to believe in something that you know nothing of."18

Also, there was no need for external remedies, for Jesus understood the difference between the inner cause and the outer effect: "Why did he not apply some remedies to the arm? The fact was that Jesus knew that the arm was not the cause but the effect, and he addressed himself to the intelligence, and applied his wisdom to the cause."19

Again, in the healing account of the Canaanite woman's daughter (Matthew 15:21-28, Mark 7:24-30), Quimby cites a later and inferior text instead of an earlier and more accurate one, found in the Gospel of Mark.

The point that Quimby makes here is that the belief in a vexing devil was based on a religious teaching (though given the woman's Phoenician location and culture, probably a pagan one), and that this is not the correct way to view illness or healing: "If the priests had not taught the existence of a devil, then the woman would not have been vexed with one. Jesus knew it was her belief and therefore kept silent, but the mother cried the louder and entreated him to cure her, and when he saw her faith, he cured her daughter."20

In the case of the epileptic boy (Matthew 17:14-21, Mark 9:14-29, Luke 9:37-43), Quimby takes a look at the Gospel of Mark as well as Matthew, and his commentary is enriched because he examined both texts. He emphasizes that the healing was not the result of the entry of some mysterious power from the outside. Rather, faith released Divine Principle into action, working from the inside out, from center to circumference, from consciousness to manifestation: "He cured the child, not by a `power' but by his wisdom, for he knew what he was about. So their faith in him [the parents' faith, though the Bible texts mention only the boy's father], kept the child from having any more fits. All his cures went to prove his theory of the mind. This theory of Christ was what he talked about. It was a science."21

Quimby believed firmly in the ultimate triumph of his principles, even as he stood alone in sharing and practicing them in his own time. The Book of Revelation speaks of final outcomes, and as Quimby views the book:

They [Jesus' adversaries] created a God after their own heart or wisdom and set Him in the heaven of their own belief. Thus the priests have placed misconceptions on every passage in the Bible, which condemns superstition and takes all the wisdom to themselves, while the very Science that the Bible contains is their worst enemy. This has made the war spoken of in Revelation ... seem to be written by an insane man. If anyone will look at it, it will be seen that it is a book of the progress of science over the opinions of the priests. It will be seen how he labored to show the people that the priests' ideas bound them and kept them in bondage. But his writings fell into the hands of the priests who put their own construction upon them and turned the guns on the people, who might be taught to see through their wisdom.22

Revelation 3:20 reads: "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me." In referring to this verse, Quimby states that people's beliefs about themselves, as being limited to their physical forms, have created disease and pain. "This is the prison that Christ, not Jesus, entered and broke the walls by his word or power and set the captives free. At this door he stands and knocks, and if we let Him in, He will explain away the error or forgive the sin and save the soul. He will deliver us from our earthly hell that is made by the wisdom of the world."23

Revelation 8:1 relates the opening of the seventh seal, and Quimby mentions this image: "The Science of Health which Jesus taught was practiced by his faith or wisdom and his instrument was man. He took man after he had been beaten, bruised and deceived by the priests and doctors and applied his science of Christ to put him in tune, so that he could sing psalms to the one living and true science and appreciate Jesus as the medium for `he hath opened the seventh seal' that can correct the errors of man who shall be saved from disease and misery."24

An allegory in the 12th chapter of Revelation tells of a celestial woman who gives birth to a male child, but is opposed by a great red dragon. The archangel Michael arrives with his angels and defeats the dragon and his angels. Quimby relates these images partially to the contemporaneous military struggle between the Northern and Southern states. The essay in which his comments appear is dated July 16, 1864, at which time the war continued but the tide was soon to turn in favor of the Union. Abraham Lincoln had already issued the Emancipation Proclamation:

Every development of wisdom, whether applied to creeping things or to the elements of freedom, is a child of God. Concealed in the egg of slavery, wisdom is kept warm by the heat of discussion, but now it has broken its shell and assumed a character and the enemies of freedom, like those of Christ, stand ready to devour it as soon as it is born. But the mother of freedom will receive the child to its bosom and will flee into the wilderness till the time arrives when the senses of man have so changed that slavery will be chained to the lowest grade of brutality and there in the wilderness it will die and be forgotten.25

Revelation, Chapter 20, presents the image of a lake of fire. Many readers have found this to be ominous, but Quimby understands that it refers to the final destruction of error.

To reach Christ is to put heaven in practice, to liberate the poor and sick who have been bound by the false ideas of the world. I know of no other world than that which Jesus set up in man's heart, which meant the mind. He never had any reference to this globe as a world. His two worlds were science and error. He made but one for himself, and that was science. But man has made another world from his beliefs and that was the world that he came into, in order to cast out the children of the kingdom of error into a lake of fire. That is, he enters man's belief and destroying all error, he establishes his kingdom of science so that men shall come from the east and west, north and south and sit down with wisdom. It is then that the children of error are cast out and that was the end of the world.26

Quimby made many references to the image of a new heaven and a new earth, found in Revelation 21:1-5. It is clear that he recognized the potential of Jesus' principles and teachings to transform not only individual lives, but also the collective consciousness and imagery of the entire planet. The New Jerusalem shall be established within us.

Establish the true philosophy of goodness and happiness and then you have a heaven on earth. Then Jesus' words will come to pass, when he said, I will create a new heaven or philosophy and a new earth or matter where there shall not be any darkness but all light. This is the new heaven or philosophy that was foretold in the days of the wise men and repeated by Jesus eighteen-hundred years ago. Now I will show you the new philosophy of Jerusalem that man is destined to enter; where there shall be no more sickness or death; where all things are done away and all things become new.27

There are many who will find that Phineas P. Quimby's basic vision of life and truth agrees with their own. For such, as we read in I John 2:8, the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.


References to Phineas Parkhurst Quimby: The Complete Writings are shown according to volume and page number. The volume is shown by Roman numerals (I, II, or III), and the page numbers by Arabic numerals.

1. Ervin Seale, editor, Phineas Parkhurst Quimby: The Complete Writings (Marina del Rey, CA.: DeVorss & Company, c. 1988), III, 162.
2. I, 209.
3. II, 90; 1-306. II, 90 contains a typographical error. The verse in question is I Samuel 28:7, not I Samuel 18:7.
4. II, 317 (cf. I-272).
5. II, 76.
6. II, 74.
7. II, 76.
8. I, 217 (cf. I, 294, III, 141).
9. III, 220.
10. II, 199.
11. III, 228 (cf. III-279).
12. II, 181.
13. III, 133 (cf. III-165).
14. III, 165.This quotation from Quimby paraphrases Acts 17:23. Also, in his full commentary, he again shows that he is following the wording in the Gospel of Matthew.
15. I, 316.
16. I, 319 (cf. I, 407, in which he calls disease "white slavery").
17. I, 412 (cf. II, 90).
18. I, 357.
19. III, 303.
20. II, 61.
21. III, 329.
22. III, 373.
23. III, 169 (cf. III, 267; III, 398).
24. III, 132.
25. III, 380.
26. II, 69 (cf. I, 304).
27. I, 299 (cf. I, 207; II, 68; II, 106; II, 149; II, 166; II, 313; III, 73-75; III, 118; III, 150-151; III, 258).

Robert Winterhalter is president of the Society for the Study of Metaphysical Religion. His doctorate is in Biblical Studies. He is a minister both of Unity and of Divine Science, and has served in various field ministries. His Unity ordination is by the Unity-Progressive Council. Currently, he teaches in the External Degree Program of the Emma Curtis Hopkins College & Seminary. His books include The Odes of Solomon, The Fifth Gospel, Jesus' Parables, and the forthcoming work, The Healing Christ. He has done extensive research on the Quimby writings.

[Originally published in the Journal of the Society for the Study of Metaphysical Religion, JSSMR 7:2, FALL 2001. Reprinted by the Phineas Parkhurst Quimby Resource Center with permission from the author who retains all publishing rights. — Ron Hughes]