“Science is the ladder by which life may quickly ascend,
but until science recognizes a spiritual force as the one
essential force, of which all other forces are incidental
phenomena, progress must be limited.”
“We have purpose to progress beyond the vision of man,
but even material progress, to be constructive and permanent,
must be governed by a vision beyond the day. We
are trying to extend that vision.”
Immediately after the first Lesson had
been given, Cass telephoned that the news
from France was alarming. It was Saturday,
March 23d. The great German offensive of
1918 had begun two days earlier, and the
Allied forces were falling back, with appalling
losses. I asked Mary K. whether she could
tell us anything about it.
“Yes. It is a force of destruction, momentarily
victorious, but Germany cannot win.
She moves steadily toward her destruction.”
Remembering our differing conceptions of
time, I asked: “Do you speak in terms finite
or infinite?”
“You will see her defeat soon, but the fight
eternal will not be over with the end of the
Great War. That will be only a temporary
lull, and we shall have it all to do over and
over, until conscious purpose ends it. Do not
fear.” The emphasis is hers.
To be sure I had made no mistake, I pressed
the inquiry again.
“You need not fear the end of the war. It
is certain and inevitable. Germany is doomed,
and must work her way back to light. This is
not foreordained, but here we already see the
end, and are looking toward the battles that
will still be raging when the countries of the
world seem peaceful.”
[Some weeks later, this confident prophecy
was slightly modified in its letter, though not
in its spirit, when she said: “Unless the Allied
purpose is undermined by forces of spiritual
disintegration, Germany is doomed, but the
fight must be kept up with confidence and
consciously united force and purpose.” This,
however, merely emphasizes the teaching of
all the lessons, that constructive purpose cannot
find expression in passivity, that he who
would live must fight, and that he who is not
actively striving for progress is arrayed against
it.]
As has been said, my knowledge of philosophies
is of the slightest, and there is scarcely
a suggestion contained in the first Lesson that
was not new to me and entirely foreign to my
habit of thought. Therefore, I sent a copy of
it to Mr. Kendal, asking him to tell me whether
the cosmic theory there outlined was familiar
to him. Conscious of Mary K.’s summons, I
took up a pencil.
“Tell Mr. Kendal the philosophers have perceived
the truth in fragments. This is to be
the whole truth, as far as it can be understood
on your plane. It may sound, at moments,
like a patchwork of philosophies, because all—or
most—of them have some truth. He will
help you in this. He found the truth in spite
of philosophies, and it is part of his work to
help others find it because of one—a philosophy
not dreamed, but lived and proved and known.
Therefore, not a philosophy, but a faith.”
The next day, we dined with friends of that
Anne Lowe for whom I had asked the first
night Mary K. came to me, and from her long
messages to them, a few may be quoted.
“... It has always been easy for me to
reach you, because you never doubted that I
was there. Doubt is one of the things we
cannot reach through. Doubt, bitterness, grief—all
these are destructive forces.” To a
statement that they had felt deep grief, she
returned: “You have not had the kind of
grief that would shut me out. You have shut
out some helpful forces, but you will do that
no longer. It is because the force may reach
you through me that I can come. We are the
same purpose, and I can reach you freely.
We can always reach those who are very near
and dear. Sometimes people are dear to us
there who are not really near us here. They
do not need us, nor we them. It is an ephemeral
relation. Love lasts eternally. Please
don’t ever forget that.... Listen to me. I
cannot always reach you as directly as this,
but just as soon as you learn to read my
thoughts, as I now read yours, a messenger will
not be necessary.”
Briefly she explained to them the eternal
significance of the Great War, the united purpose
of Germany, and the failure of the Allies,
thus far, to comprehend the essence of unity.
Elizabeth, one of her friends, mentioned that
it was like her to drop personalities for great
issues, and she replied:
“The reason that I told you the thing I did
about the great purposes and the eternal conflict
is that I want you to realize a little of
what it is all for, and to help you recognize
the great ends toward which your problems
lead. Build, build, never cease to build.
Unite yourself to anybody who is of your
purpose. Keep as clear as you can from
entangling yourselves with forces of disintegration.”
Miss S——, a teacher, and a stranger to me,
was present, and after a little her brother took
control of the pencil.
“You cannot realize how intimately we work
together still,” was one of his assertions to
her. “You are a fine force for progress. You
are being and teaching the things we all work
for here. Teach, above all, unity of purpose.
Never mind the method. Look to the goal.
Building, light, freedom, faith—these are what
the forces of construction stand for, the way
to the great purpose. The forces of disintegration
are gathering for a tremendous fight. The
Great War is one of the crises of civilization,
but the battle to come still is one of the crises
of eternity. It is for that we are preparing
now. This is what we must say to all dear to
us and, through them, to as wide a public as
we can reach.... It is a great message that
is to be given. To-day I only want you to be
sure that I know all you feel and all you have
suffered, and that the more confidently and
freely you reach out to me, knowing I am
there, the more easily and surely I can reach
you.”
Like the others, this man used the circle,
which we were beginning to perceive must
signify more than joy, as we understand the
word. For example, on this occasion it was
used thus: “You will look for me now, listen
for me, feel me near you, and the (O) will be
as near your life as it ever can be there.”
After telling her of the frequent use of this
symbol, I asked him whether it had not a
deeper significance—perhaps completion, perfection,
consummate unity, something joyous
of this larger sort, to which he replied in the
affirmative.
A night or two after this, Cass suggested
that we must make an effort to get into touch
with David Bruce, but I said that we had
asked about him several times, and that if
he wished or needed to communicate with his
family he would undoubtedly let me know.
Aware of Mrs. Bruce’s interest in psychic
phenomena, I thought they might have established
communication in some way. Within a
few minutes I was conscious of a summons to
the pencil.
First came Mary K.’s strong signature.
Then, very quickly: “David Bruce is here, and
wa....” There it ran off into nervous, illegible
waves. When I said I could not follow,
and asked that the message be more
slowly given, it was resumed where it had been
dropped. “... wants to talk to E ... Bess.”
His wife’s name is Elizabeth, and naturally
was in my mind, but having written E, the
pencil balked, delayed, crossed out the E,
and finally wrote “Bess,” firmly.
“Thank you,” was the response to my promise
to arrange the interview. For the first
time it occurred to me that possibly Mary K.
had given over the pencil, and I asked who
was writing, to be told quickly: “D. B.”
Mrs. Bruce came the next day to talk to
him, and Mary K. told me, before her arrival,
to give her no details about the previous messages,
adding: “He will tell her.” And while
his opening message to her merely summarizes
similar assertions previously received, it is interesting
as the first consecutive personal
statement of the survival of individuality in
the eternal pursuance of constructive purpose.
“I am here with you, darling Bess, as I
have been with you from the start,” he began
at once. “You have known it all the time,
and I have been able to reach you in a way
that I can only describe to you as spiritual.”
Here was the first veiled allusion, at first
rather puzzling, to that unknown force afterward
mentioned by William James and others.
“We so long to tell you whom we love not
to grieve. We are of you, as you are of us.
Even more closely than we were when I was
visibly with you. Perfect union is only possible
to pure spirit. That will come. Meanwhile,
one of us is pure spirit, and both of us
so much the richer thereby. Once, in the beginning
of things, you and I were the same
purpose. Purposes are eternal. They may
be temporarily divided, temporarily overcome
by the forces of disintegration, which are forever
seeking to destroy, but forever each divided
purpose answers to the call of its own.
You and I were one purpose in the first, and
we shall be perfectly reunited when you have
joined me here. But while we were one in the
beginning, one with many others of our great
purpose, we are now eternally definite and
separate individuals, but united as perfectly,
after the first life there, as if we had returned
to one unit.... The first message any of us
send must be this one. That is the reason
we can come so freely now and tell so much.”
A little later, speaking of their children, he
said: “All young people have battles to fight
and problems to solve. Don’t try to spare
them that. It is thus they learn life’s lessons,
and the more they learn there the readier they
will be to do the fine and glorious work here.”
He had spoken before of being very busy,
and now she commented: “He seems so interested
in the work!”
“Interested is not the word. It’s more like
inspiration.”
“Was the passing difficult?” she asked.
“Not difficult at all. The pain ended with
unconsciousness.”
“But you had no pain!”
“Yes, I had some—not expressed, nor quite
definite. Difficult to explain until experienced.
Words do not convey the sensation. Not quite
fear, not quite pain, but a strange moment of
suffering. Then consciousness again, beauty,
force, perfectly clear perceptions, but a period
of something approaching incredulity.” I
mentioned Frederick’s statement that he had
been “dazed by the bigness of it,” and Mr.
Bruce went on. “That’s it. The bigness of
it is indescribable, and so extraordinarily lovely
and high that it is not readily realized or
grasped.”
She said she had dreaded to have him go
alone, and asked whether some one met
him.
“Yes, we are very tenderly received. There
is always a part of one’s own purpose waiting.”
“Have you seen Jack?”
“Yes; he is still a little bewildered, but will
soon be in fighting trim again.” This young
man had been killed in an accident.
“‘In fighting trim’!” she repeated. “How
funny!”
“No, it isn’t funny. We fight perpetually,
and love it. It is a wonderful thing to fight
with the great forces, and to know why.
Most of those in your life fight in confusion
and doubt, and suffer. But here we unite
ourselves to a definite and constructive purpose,
and the fight is glorious.”
“Do you see Granny?”
“No. She has gone on to a life beyond
ours. She will come back, some day, and I
will see her.”
“You have helped me very much by believing
that I lived,” he told her, at another point.
“It is very hard for us to be put aside....
We know here how intimately our life and
yours are lived together, and the one almost
intolerable thing is to have our dear ones
live and believe that we do not. It defers
things so.... It hurts us when the apparent
separation is made real.”
“I hope you won’t get so far beyond that
I can’t catch up,” she said.
“Never! You will begin farther along than
I did. We shall go on together now, for
eternity. Since you know that I am with
you, and especially as we live and work consciously
together, we shall grow together.”
“Did I do all I could for you, at the last?
Did you feel my fear?”
“No, I did not feel your fear. But when
one knows that the step is coming, there is
one blinding moment of dread.... You kept
me a little while,” he continued, when she
said that she had tried to hold him here, “but
the thing had gone too far.”
“Was there anything we could have done
that was not done?”
“Nothing. It had to be.” But when she
inferred that the time had come for him to
take up work in the next plane, he protested.
“No. Nothing like that is ‘intended.’ There
is no foreordination. It is all a matter of
forces, constructive and destructive. My material
energy was too little to withstand the
material forces of destruction. My flesh yielded.
That has no real relation to eternal
force.... One serves one’s purpose, here or
there. I am doing better work here than I
could have done there, but that has no relation
or part in death. It is entirely a physical
thing.”
“Did —— make you nervous?”
“No mere man could make me fail to respond
to your call to courage. I knew and
you knew, that it might be the end of life
there; but there was no possible thing that
you could have done, mentally, physically, or
spiritually, that you did not do. It was your
courage that kept me calm, even through that
dread moment; your spirit that met me when
I woke here; your tenderness that soothed
my first bewilderment; your purpose that
roused me to better, broader, finer work than
I had ever dreamed before. It has been you—you
and I, one always—that have helped
and upheld me, as your faith has enabled me
to reach and uphold you.”
This interview took place in the afternoon,
and with a good deal of incidental conversation,
covered several hours, leaving me very
tired. But after dinner the familiar summons
warned me that my services were again in
demand. I took up a pencil, and Mary K.
announced the second Lesson, which followed
rapidly, with the same unhesitating flow that
had characterized the first one.
Meanwhile, happy letters were coming almost
daily from the Gaylord family, and less
frequently, but with expressions of equal conviction,
from Mr. Kendal.
Mrs. Gaylord had promised to spend Easter
week with relatives, in a Middle Western town,
which she had not visited—indeed, had scarcely
dared to think of—since taking Frederick’s
body there for burial; and the day after the
second Lesson was given she arrived in New
York, where she paused briefly en route, her
elder daughter and son-in-law joining her the
next morning.
Although her train arrived late in the evening,
we talked a little to Frederick before
separating for the night. We had been commenting
on her changed appearance.
“Mother dearest, you are not much differenter
than I am,” he began, after the usual
signature.
“Why, Frederick!” she exclaimed. “Are you
better, too?”
He made the enthusiastic little circle so
often used. “(O) So much better! You can’t
guess how much better I am. It helps me as
much as it does you.”
“Were you at Mrs. Z——’s the other day?”
she asked, referring to a visit to a “medium,”
of which I had not been informed.
“I was that, but she fell down on what
I was trying to get over,” was the reply.
When his mother said she had not received
what she expected on that occasion, he returned:
“Nor what we expected.... She’s all
right, as far as she goes.” He told her, also,
that the woman accompanying him, described
by Mrs. Z——, had been his father’s mother.
“This is a nice, peaceful powwow we’re having
to-night,” he commented, when they had
exchanged views concerning various personal
matters. “I had to work last time, but this
time I’m here for....”
The pencil paused, and I asked: “For what?”
“Just for a good time, Mrs. L——. Sis is
coming to the party to-morrow. Hooray!”
A little later, when she expressed some uncertainty
about her ability to go through an
Easter in K——, with all its sad associations,
unshaken, he warned her: “Don’t you go backsliding!”
Continuing, she told us that his
last illness had developed just before Easter,
and that in his desire to give the family an
unclouded day he had persuaded a friend to
send them a typewritten letter, which he signed,
containing no intimation of his illness.
“I’ll write you a letter this Easter with a
lot more pep in it,” he promised. “You go
on and have your Easter presents, and flowers,
and eggs, and all, and when you begin backsliding,
stop ... look ... listen[7] ... and I’ll
be on the crossing, ringing the bell.”
With an ejaculation of surprise, his mother
told us that she had been recently in the home
of a traffic expert, whose large hall was strikingly
decorated with signs for the regulation
of traffic.
“I believe that’s what he’s thinking of!”
she exclaimed.
“Sure, you’ve got it! I’ll ask Sis to buy
you a bell for me, to remind you.”
This diversion had completely banished the
gathering sadness of her reminiscences, and
she began talking of Washington, whence she
had come, saying that there seemed to be a
good deal of pessimism in official circles concerning
war conditions. It will be remembered
that the bombardment of Paris, by a
long-distance gun, began March 23d.
“There are lots of things Washington doesn’t
know,” Frederick assured her. “The end of
the war must come soon.”
We wondered, as I had before, how much
difference there was between his conception of
time, as indicated by the word “soon,” and
ours.
“None of us can name the day and hour,
but we see the inevitable end coming soon.
Germany knows she is weakened, but doesn’t
know why. We do, and we have told you.
No nation on earth can fight this fight alone,
deserted by all purposes, both for good and
evil, and with only one force left—Fear.”
[Long afterward, Mary K. said to me, in
this connection: “We see the awakening purpose
of forces for progress in your life, and
are able to help them in proportion to the
vigor with which that purpose is put into
action. Germany, on the other hand, fights
now with only physical power. Eternal forces
are implacably against her, and the forces of
destruction have abandoned her. She has no
ally here now. Her unity is destroyed, while
ours is strengthening. The only danger, as
far as the war is concerned, lies in a weakening
of actual purpose, forcefully expressed in
action. We are your allies, answering your call
and inciting you to endeavor. When Germany
began this war she had superhuman
strength, which the world was unprepared to
meet, but for every vibration of pure constructive
purpose among the Allied forces we
have added two, and only a weakening of your
purpose can defeat us now. Every individual
among you who fails to strive for victory with
all his strength invites disaster.”]
Frederick’s talk with his mother was brief
that night, and when she arose, to return to
her hotel, he said: “Good night. I am going
home with you, if I may.”
This seemed to Cass and me a curious
phrase, under the circumstances, and we also
commented upon his generous use of slang,
especially in the latest interview, wondering
whether it were characteristic of him.
The next morning his sister, Mrs. Wylie,
arrived with her husband, to spend a day with
Mrs. Gaylord in New York. It chanced that
they had been away from home for several
weeks and had seen none of Frederick’s manuscript,
nor any copy of it. As she read—from
the original roll—his messages of the preceding
evening, she constantly exclaimed: “How
characteristic!” and his closing phrase brought
tears to her eyes. She told me, then, that
along with a copious use of slang, Frederick
had preserved an odd little formality of phrase,
even in his closest personal relations—a trait
not common to other members of the family.
Later, in glancing for the first time through
the typewritten record of earlier interviews,
again and again she expressed astonishment at
the characteristic quality of his phraseology,
which had not been mentioned to me before.
Mrs. Gaylord had spoken of her vivid consciousness
of his personality, imbuing all he
said to her, and had told me, during the earlier
days of this intercourse, more or less about
his habit of thought, but it is characteristic
of her to ignore minor details, and only when
Mrs. Wylie arrived did I learn anything about
his habit of speech.
“Frederick,” he announced, when we invited
communication, his bold signature
stretching across the whole width of the paper.
“Hello, Sis! This is too good not to be true!
Hello, Dick!” This to Mr. Wylie, whose marriage
to his sister had taken place during the
last weeks of his illness. “Welcome home to
the family! We’re all in it now, for good and
all. This is the thing we’ve all needed, I
almost as much as the rest of you, but I did
know that sooner or later it must come, so I
could bear it better than you could.”
It must not be understood that all these
communications came as consecutively as they
are presented here. There were frequent pauses;
sometimes because of our preoccupation in conversation;
sometimes, apparently, because of
difficulties of transmission not explained. Occasionally
I stopped to verify a word or a
phrase, asking if it had been correctly taken,
and with increasing frequency the pencil returned
without suggestion from me, to cross
out false starts. Some of the latter, which
seemed significant, will be indicated from time
to time. The following message, however,
came rapidly, without pause.
“We are all of kindred purposes. That’s
the reason we cling to each other so. Family
hasn’t a thing to do with it. It was our good
fortune to have no forces of disintegration in
our immediate group. We are all builders, in
one way or another. Not all in the same way,
but all for the great purpose. This is one of
the things I have wanted to say to you. Don’t
be misled by transient relationships of that
life. Respect them, but don’t be eternally influenced
by them, because when you get over
here you’ll find that some of the people you’ve
thought you were most fond of have simply
dropped out. You don’t need them, nor they
you. Find your purposes clearly, and stick
to them. We all have purpose, but not all of
you there have found out just what yours is.
Find it, and follow it fearlessly. There, that’s
off my chest!”
Mr. Wylie spoke of the “upside-down stunt,”
of which some one had written him, and I said it
had been done chiefly to convince me—to show
me, in Frederick’s phrase, “who was running it.”
“You know now who is running it,” he contributed,
“but you’re certainly formal with
strangers!”
In the midst of some talk of ours, the pencil
swung off with vigor, writing, “Sis!” in huge
script, like a joyous exclamation, ending in
strong circles. “Just wait till I catch Dad!”
he went on. “And Babe, too! All of us together!
Margaret will have to forget her
formality then, I tell you!”
Mrs. Wylie mentioned the common impression
that personality must be transmuted
by death into something remote and strange—that
only the soul survived. “Of course, we
love the soul of any one dear to us,” she said.
“But, after all, the thing we know best, and
therefore love best, is the habit of thought—the
characteristic mental attitude, and it is
so wonderful to find Frederick unchanged—just
like himself.”
“Sure! Why not?” he returned. “You
people must learn that this isn’t ‘like himself.’
It is himself. Right here on the job.”
“Those words!” His mother and sister exchanged
startled glances. Then they told me
that just before his long struggle for life on
this plane ended, when during six months his
powers of recuperation had repeatedly astonished
surgeons and nurses, he opened his
eyes, to find his father bending over him, and
whispered for the last time: “On the job.”
“I’ve always been on it since, too,” he
rapidly assured them, “and longing to tell you
so. You never can know, until you try it,
how we hate to be left out. We’re on the job
as you can’t even imagine, and it makes us
sort o’ sick that we can’t get it over to you
of our own love and purpose.”
He interrupted the talk following this with:
“Trot along to lunch! I want to start going
and not stop. Get it over, do!”
So we trotted, and got it over as soon as
possible, though throughout the meal he insisted
upon having a voice in the conversation,
writing messages on all the blank paper we
had about us, and over the backs of the
available menu cards.
“You can’t lose me, and needn’t try,” he
told me, and when I protested that he was
making it impossible for me to finish my
luncheon, he retorted: “You have a perfectly
good left hand. Eat with that.”
Several times Mr. Wylie expressed his interest
in what he called “the upside-down
stunt,” and when we were again seated about
a writing-table, Frederick “demonstrated.”
“Incidentally, Dick,” he mentioned, starting
at my right and writing toward my left,
“you wanted to see this work. Well, here you
are. This is the way it is done.”
As this began, Mrs. Gaylord smiled, pulling
her chair nearer to the table, where she could
watch every movement of the pencil.
“Sit up closer, Mother dearest,” Frederick
continued, “and everybody hold hands.” Looking
slightly bewildered, she held out her hands
to the others. I said that he had used a figure
of speech, but she thought he had meant
it literally, and we referred the question to
him. “Yes, all but your writing-hand,” he
said; so we all joined hands, and I asked
why.
“Just to make us know more surely that
we are all one and indivisible, from now on
through eternity. Easter resurrection for every
one of us. We are all born again, to some extent,
by our communion in this way; I more
than you, because I have left the flesh behind.
But to you has come new life, new force, new
purpose, new faith, through your touch with
this life of pure spirit. It is truly your resurrection.
This is your Easter message. Hail!
And be happy ever after!”
I anticipated none of this message, and its
tenor surprised me greatly. Before I had recovered
from my astonishment Mrs. Gaylord
exclaimed: “That must be the Easter letter
he promised me!” Immediately he signed it.
“Frederick, to Mother and all of you.”
We spoke of the relation of this whole
revelation to orthodox religion, and some one
said that it was not in accordance with the
Bible.
“Yes, it is,” he contradicted. “You have
never learned to read the Bible in this light.
The great prophecies have always been phrased
in the language, and more or less in the spirit,
of the time in which they were uttered. This
is the first time in the history of the world
when physical science has been sufficiently
advanced to enable us to tell the people the
truth in terms they would truly understand.
Prophecies have been veiled, apparently, not
because the truth was vague, but because men
were not prepared to understand it in all its
details. Nor are they now. But this is to be
the whole truth, as far as it can be understood
now by your prophets and people. And for
the first time it is possible to give it to you
directly in this way, without pretense or mystery,
book or bell, a natural law operating
naturally and freely, through an accredited
messenger who makes no claim to inspiration.”
In the course of our drifting talk his mother
remembered that Mrs. Z—— had tried to
convey a warning through her from Frederick
to Mr. Wylie, but had been unable to tell her
what it concerned. After some effort to discover
its connection, suggesting possible journeys
or business ventures, Mrs. Z—— had
finally said that Dick was about to do something,
she did not know what; but whatever
it was, Frederick said he must not do it. Mrs.
Gaylord now asked Frederick what he had
intended to say.
“She didn’t get my message. I was trying
to tell him not to be fearful about anything.”
Mr. Wylie is sometimes prey to nervous apprehension
and worry. “It keeps us back and
we can’t help him as we’re trying to do. Open
up, Dick! Let us in and we’ll all pull together.”
This apparently touched some situation
unknown to me, for Mr. and Mrs. Wylie
exchanged glances, and instantly Frederick
made his quick circles. “(O) That’s it! Now
we’re off! No, it isn’t incredible,” he added,
replying to some comment of theirs. “It’s the
truest thing you ever heard. But Mrs. Z——
can’t get beyond externals.”
This seems to be a very good example of
the way certain messages are confused by the
persons through whom they come. In this
case, while the intended warning was conveyed,
a purely subjective and spiritual message was
so distorted, however unconsciously and unintentionally,
that it was given an objective
and material significance.
Asked whether an acquaintance of theirs
would be helped by a knowledge of their intercourse
with him, he said: “She is not ready
for this yet. Few people, comparatively, are
free enough to accept it. It has been forbidden
by the church, ridiculed by the laity, and
labelled ‘poison, don’t touch’ by neurologists
and the scientific, half-baked intellectuals.”
“Fake mediums have done a lot to bring it
into disrepute,” Mr. Wylie suggested.
“That’s the reason for some of it. Another
reason, less obvious to you, but equally potent,
is that people who had the sensitiveness
to be messengers frequently lacked the purpose
of truth fundamentally, and though
thinking they were honest, entertained devils
unaware.... That is the reason so many
people have gone to pieces, mentally and
physically. The purposes of disintegration
caught them and destroyed them. But this
time, we beat them to it.”
“All philosophies have had some foundation
of truth,” he told us, a little later, “or they
would not have been permitted to live. This
new faith will be attacked by the disintegrating
forces, in an attempt to discredit it as a patchwork
of philosophies. The new truths they
will ignore, or flatly deny. But this is the
whole truth, as far as it can be told now.
Believe it, follow it, preach it, live it, and we
shall truly build that structure I told you of,
Mother dearest, of force, light, and sweetness—which
is you. I seem to be doing a darned
lot of preaching!”
“It isn’t like you, either,” his mother remarked.
“You see, we’ve got to get this over. It’s
imperative.”
At that, she said it was like him, after all,
because he had always talked eagerly to the
family about his “job,” whatever it might be,
adding: “Is it ‘imperative’ because of the war
and the sorrow? Or because the time is ripe?”
“It’s because there’s the very devil of a fight
coming, and we’ve got to gather every force
we have, and unite it.”
“Is beating the Germans helping the constructive
force? Or is the war merely the
awakening through suffering?”
“Germany has been united in purpose as a
destructive force for many years. They gave
themselves deliberately, not as individuals, but
as a people, to what parsons call the powers
of darkness. We know them to be forces of
disintegration, which found in Germany their
strongest ally in the civilized world. We’ve
been fighting Germany and her purposes here
for years, I find. Suffering makes people
readier to listen to truth, but beating Germany
was as necessary to the world’s health as
sanitation to a hospital.”
“That’s a clear and explicit statement,”
some one said.
“We are perfectly definite and explicit about
questions of eternal purpose. The difficulty
with most people is that they want to know
how much U. S. Steel will go up next Tuesday,
or whether to give the baby soothing-syrup.”
After some interchange concerning his father
and younger sister, he said, “I want to write
them an Easter greeting.” So we got a fresh
roll of paper, and he wrote a brief but tender
letter, which was sent to them that night.
“Which one of us will be best able to do
this?” Mrs. Wylie asked.
“... The time will come when this sort of
thing is unnecessary. We can talk without
material aid.... We never know when the
power is going to develop. It’s much like an
electric current. You never know it’s there
until you feel it—until your signal comes over
the wire.... Try it out, all of you. We know
no more about who can do it than you do,
except in cases of extraordinary power.” Some
time afterward, however, he warned them of
the dangers of attempting to handle this force,
intimating that great conservation of energy
in other directions should accompany the
endeavor.
His mother spoke of his being happy, and he
returned: “Perfectly happy now, thank you.
It’s the eternal thing, really started. I hate
to have this party break up, but anyhow it
isn’t for long. I’ve been away longer, when I
lived there, than I shall be now, and we are
all of us as sure of the next meeting, and the
next good time, as we were then.”
“He knows it is ending, and we must go
to our trains,” Mrs. Gaylord said.
“Not ending at all. Beginning! Hooray!”
On that triumphant note they took their
departure, Mrs. Gaylord westward bound, the
Wylies to New England; but, owing to a defective
timepiece, both missed their trains.
Within an hour, Mrs. Wylie telephoned me
that her mother had caught—by the narrowest
margin—a later train, hoping to secure
sleeping-accommodation after leaving, a dubious
venture in these days of diminished service
and crowded trains. We arranged to
dine and spend the evening together.
Afterward, it occurred to me that Frederick
might prefer to be with his mother that night,
and I asked Mary K. about it.
“Frederick has engaged his mother in
(O) ...”
“What does that mean now?” I interrupted.
“Bliss?”
“Yes ... and will come here to-night to
see the others.”
Like the rest of the family, Mrs. Wylie
feared the effect of the Western visit upon
her mother’s new-found tranquillity of spirit,
and she was also uneasy lest Mrs. Gaylord had
been unable to secure Pullman accommodations.
“Mother is all right and happy,” Frederick
told us, in the evening. “She is still reading
her precious book”—a copy of his earlier interviews,
which she carried with her.
Some one asked whether he meant that her
general condition was “all right,” or that she
was “all right” on the train.
“On the train. She’s blissful!”
This was verified a day or two later by a
letter from Mrs. Gaylord, in which she said:
“I came away filled with strength and calm
and joy.” She also mentioned casually that
she had found a vacant section on the train,
and traveled comfortably.
“How does purpose combat forces of evil?”
Mr. Wylie asked.
“It is done by overpowering them, as the
sun dispels mist, separating them into smaller
particles or units. And when that is impossible,
by driving them like clouds before a high
wind. They work for evil, but can be separated
sometimes from the mass and united
with constructive forces. Only small fragments
of the main forces can be so converted,
at present. Mostly we rout them.”
“Does an evil soul lose personality?” his
sister questioned. “Is it absorbed, or broken
into fragments?”
“The individuality that finds its first expression
in your life is never absorbed or
broken up. I speak of the forces of disintegration,
composed of more individuals than
the greatest army, as being routed. We mass
ourselves and our purposes against them and
theirs, when we fight in the open here. But
as has been explained in the Lessons, the very
material form you have was originally an
effort to evolve a force not conquerable by
purpose alone. Both good and evil forces, in
your phrase—constructive and destructive, in
ours—took possession of these concrete forms,
and now the bitterness of the fight is greatest
where both forces are represented in one individual.
The only way we can fight that
effectively is to sit on the job, and try to call
to the purpose that is ours more clearly and
appealingly, or more commandingly, than the
other fellow does. That’s the reason we are
begging you now to work with us. A great
crisis is at hand, and we want you to meet it
consciously in your life there, knowing its
nature, so that we can have your help, not only
in withstanding material onslaughts, like Germany’s
invasions and brutality, but in things of
the spirit—the real things, the eternal things—so
that together we may win a real victory.
The individual whose purposes are fundamentally
destructive is not damned nor lost.
He is just delayed. Sooner or later he must
work his way up, and it is entirely up to him
whether he does it sooner or later—after he
reaches this life, especially. In your life, he
is sometimes confused or misled. He pays for
that, too—not pays, but makes good for it,
by working here for the development he had
not sense enough to take there. But his delay
is brief, beside that of the essentially destructive
force.”
A little later, Mrs. Wylie spoke again of
her uneasiness about her mother’s visit to
K——, and some one suggested telegraphing
her that Frederick had been with us that
evening.
“Give her my love when you wire,” he directed,
“and tell her I’m on the crossing, still
ringing that bell. Don’t you worry, Sis. I’ll
go and stay with her most of the time she’s
there, and she’ll know it. I’ll come to you,
Easter, too, for a little while.... Tell Dad I’ll
be taking care of Mother. He needn’t fret
about it.”
“Do you want me to look up ‘Bob’ and tell
him about his little girl?” she asked.
He replied, “Yes, do.” And when she
asked if he could give her something more
definite than a Christian name by which to
trace this unknown man among his large and
scattered acquaintance, he wrote the name of
a Middle Western city, adding: “You can
find out from the fellows. All of them know
Bob.”
This seems to be a case of marked deflection
of ray, to use Mr. Kendal’s simile, for up to
the day when this manuscript goes to the
printer the Gaylord family have been unable
to identify “Bob,” although there was a confused
intimation, late in April, that Mrs. Z——
had made a mistake in the name, and a suggestion
that the surname was Roberts. It is
not impossible that this was one of those
wily incursions of disintegrating force, with intent
to confuse, to which we afterward grew
accustomed.
On Friday and Saturday of that week
(March 29th and 30th), there were interviews of
great interest, but of too personal a character
to be extensively quoted.
Replying to the inquiry of a man for his
father, Mary K. said: “He was a great force
here, but has passed on into the life beyond
ours. He can and will return to talk to you,
but not immediately.”
“Tell G—— the constructive forces are working
for him, as he for them,” was the answer
to questions about a man in this life. “Temporary
disappointments are unimportant. Do
not fear. We build together, and surely. The
result is certain and for his purpose—progress,
light, and justice. His individual concern is
to have faith, follow his purpose, and trust
us. The only failure possible comes from admitting
doubt, disintegration, and fear.”
An expression of anxiety concerning another
man on this plane was met thus: “N—— has
felt his own purpose stirring a little.... A
perfectly good purpose when he finds it. He
has had many forces fighting, within and without.
He will wake when this message is
given to the world. He is too intelligent not
to recognize truth as obvious as this will be.”
Some one asked when this would occur.
“When Margaret completes the book she will
publish soon.” This was the first intimation
of the way in which I was expected to carry
out Mary K.’s instructions to make this experience
known, concerning which we had
wondered not a little.
It was suggested that a member of this
person’s family might help him, from the next
plane, but this was said to be impossible, as
they were not of the same purpose.
“The family connection is nothing here.
His own purposes know him, both good and
bad, and they are fighting it out. He has answered
first one, then another. But fundamentally
he is for justice. He will answer to
that in the end.... Sometimes he will shut it
all out and yield to the forces seeking to
destroy him, but he will fight in the end for
freedom and justice.”
“She is not of our forces,” was the reply to
an inquiry about an artist who left this life
twenty years ago. This was crossed out,
however, and “not mentally free” substituted.
When I was alone, I asked Mary K. about
this woman, and she returned: “She is not a
destructive force, but is deterrent. She is
working out problems not met when she should
have met them, and is fighting for growth,
just as she soon or late will fight for progress.
She fights for herself, her own growth, and not
for progress in the larger sense.”
Afterward, I learned, from some one who
knew her well, of this woman’s devouring and
unquenchable ambition for supremacy in her
profession.
Whimsical Anne Lowe, writing to three
friends of her continued association with them,
said: “Believe—know—that we are a positive
force, and united we stand, hurrah! Our
faith helps all beneficent purpose. Its force
is freed and multiplied by the sum of your
participation.”
“I wonder if she could tell us what our purposes
are?” Elizabeth said.
“Yours is Progress, Ruth’s is Light, Katharine’s
is Healing and Light. You are blended.
Elizabeth to push, Ruth to illumine and interpret,
Katharine to understand and soothe.”
Ruth said, wistfully: “Then all I can do is
to shine?”
“Interpreters are really prophets,” she was
told. “That is all the greatest prophets ever
were. You are of their purpose, so cheer up!”
Interrupting a little discussion as to whether
dominant purpose is born in us or developed,
she said: “We are born with many purposes,
latent and striving, but as we live we make
daily choice.”
That evening, our old friend Maynard Holt
came for a long talk. After some entirely
personal exchange, Cass spoke of Maynard
as having been, in this life, a believer in
individualism.
Beginning with some allusion to former discussions
between them, concerning what he
called “the temporary manifestations of Socialism,”
Maynard replied: “Now I can tell
you definitely that the salvation of the civilized
world is dependent on the independence of the
individual.... It’s a big and glorious period
in eternal history. The time has almost come
for the open fight. Prepare your ground carefully,
and gird up your loins for combat. It’s
coming.”
A little later, in a similar connection, he
said: “The conscious co-operation of purpose
is the only sound principle of Socialism. That
is eternally sound. And now that we are consciously
and forcefully working in harmony
with the great and eternal purpose, they can’t
stop us.”
“Has this new opportunity of communication
with this plane made you over there
happier?” he was asked.
“It has opened an entirely new channel to
us here in this part of the world. In the Far
East, we have the channel, but no hard-pan
to support the stream. Here science gives us
a foundation from which to work, but we have
had no channel through which to reach it....
Everywhere in the civilized world the minds
of intelligent people have turned to this. There
is reaching and questioning and longing, and
a dawning faith.”
At this time I did not know how frequently
belief in the possibility of communication with
those in a life beyond is accompanied by an inclination
toward the Oriental philosophies, but
Maynard’s allusion to the Far East was given
greater significance by the replies to later
questions.
To an inquiry concerning the possible influence
of these teachings in Germany, he returned:
“They are a philosophical and abstract-minded
people, and they’ll be hunting a
plausible and satisfactory explanation of themselves
before long. And this is less uncomplimentary
than the others will be, besides
having the undeniable advantage of being
true, which they will have learned, by that
time, to appreciate.”
“Can’t those with eyes, ears, and understanding
learn wisely to control, lead, and uplift
the mass?” Cass asked. “In Russia, for
example?”
“Don’t be in such a hurry. There’s all
eternity, and evolution is slow. But the mills
of the gods grind on, and the grist is sure.
The Russians, like the Germans, must climb
their own hills. America has a few to climb,
too. This will help many, uplift a few, escape
the mass, but leaven the whole. There
is no millennium at hand. This is just a
light by which the path is made more clear.
It will influence many thousands, in many
countries, but the inert mass must work its
way on, through the old channels of evolution,
made easier by knowledge and by experience
of those ahead, but not to be evaded or avoided
by any miracle.”
“But it will bring conscious purpose and
effort to bear in helping this evolution?”
“Surely. It is a message eagerly awaited
and desired.”
Later that evening, I asked Mary K. whether
she could tell me anything about the book
Anne Lowe had said I was to publish.
“Yes. It must be ready for publication
by Fall.”
“Evidently sordid, material details of book
manufacture escape your attention,” I said,
laughing. “This is the thirtieth of March,
and you have not yet given me all the material
for your book. When you have done that, it
still must be edited, assembled for publication,
copied, accepted by publishers, printed, and
sold. Perhaps you don’t know that salesmen
for publishing-houses begin taking orders for
Fall publications in June, and generally carry
sample copies of the books with them?”
She said I would have the necessary material
in a month or six weeks, and that editing would
“take another month,” from which it is evident
that no eight-hour law is operative on her
plane. She also advised me to see publishers
at once, tell them what was happening, read
them parts of communications already received,
and arrange for Fall publication, conditional
upon their satisfaction with the completed
manuscript—which, not without misgivings
concerning such procedure, I immediately prepared
to act upon.
A night or so later, Maynard Holt came
again, with his mother, who said: “Maynard
brought me to call.”
When we asked if she worked with those on
this plane, she replied: “Yes, but also with
undeveloped purposes, here before their
time.”
Returning to the subject of Russian upheaval,
Maynard said: “They are goners for
some time, now. It will take them long to
assemble their purposes again constructively.”
“If you had been here,” Cass asked, “would
you have viewed the Russian situation and its
effect on the world as you do now?”
“Not quite, I think. We see farther ahead,
and have sounder premises from which to
argue than you’ve ever had there.”
“This plan, of course, includes all the people
of the world,” Cass continued. “Are those
who leave here undeveloped, still undeveloped
there?”
“There is a large and growing population
here of the undeveloped,” was Maynard’s
reply, “which is one of the lesser reasons for
our keen desire to purposize the world.”
“What place have the unfit on your plane?”
we asked Mary K., at the conclusion of the
sixth Lesson.
“No place. They are errors of development,
and have a long struggle ahead before
they can reach the degree of development that
should have been theirs in your life. They
are fusions of weak purposes, and should not
be permitted to hold back the strong and the
fit. Development will come to them slowly,
at best, but more quickly here than there.”
“In the present stage of our development,
is there a sufficient incentive to progress, without
hope of material gain or personal improvement?”
“Any material gain that is for the constructive
purpose is a force for light and progress
in the larger sense. Material gain is deterrent
only when purpose is its price. Personal ambition
is an incentive always. When it is for
personal gain, at any price, it is deterrent.
When it is ambition to serve a great purpose
worthily, it becomes a constructive force, to
which material gain adds only more constructive
force.”
“Have you all history spread out before
you? Or are you taught after you get there?”
“We have a grasp of results, not easily
understood in your life. It is like seeing a
landscape from a high and distant hill. The
salient features are easily distinguished.”
“Are these messages for all people? Or
only for civilized people? Do they come from
Christians on your plane?”
“This is a message to the civilized world....
Jew or Gentile, Christian or agnostic, all
men are brothers in the larger sense. Uncivilized
little brothers will grow, or come to
this freer plane to join their larger purposes.”
“Then from whom do these Lessons come?”
“From great constructive purposes. There
is no sect or creed, color or prejudice, here.”
Saturday, April 6th, Mrs. Bruce came again
to talk to her husband, and he thanked her
for a public gift which she had just made in
his name, promising such co-operation in the
work it promoted as could be given from his
plane. She said that she had felt suddenly
impelled to make this contribution, and had
acted at once upon the impulse.
“You all feel impelled to work with us as
soon as you realize we are here near you,” he
told her, “and the things we can do together
are as yet undreamed in your life.”
She spoke of his former interest in the arts,
which he said he had left behind as “material
manifestations.” Discussing the relation
of artistic expression to constructive purpose,
he said: “Art, when it is a real interpretation
of life, is a high and noble thing, but the
art that is merely self-expression is a disintegrating
force. Too much of it is that now.”
At that time, she had read none of the Lessons,
and he told her of the seven purposes of
construction, continuing: “To purpose of any
nature only similar purpose calls, and when
the call is heard there is no choice but to
answer. No choice after the call has been
admitted to consciousness. It may be shut
out and denied, but once listened to, whether
for construction or for destruction, the answer
is bound to come. That is why we so insistently
urge the discovery of purpose and the
beauty of construction. Character, as you
understand it, results from the purposes admitted
to consciousness. Not always recognized,
but always let in.”
He had some difficulty in getting one word
written, and she spoke of his erasures of wrong
starts as extraordinary and unusual.
“Not a bit unusual, if you think how often
the words of your languages fail as convincing
and accurate symbols. You often correct them
yourselves. A translation may be made in any
of several ways, depending on the reactions of
the translator to certain symbols. So, when
Margaret reacts freely, we let it stand. When
she fails, wholly or in part, we correct it.”
In view of later statements concerning the
force used in these manifestations, I assume this
to mean, not that I make the translation mentioned,
but that certain symbols used in translation
are sometimes difficult to convey through
me. Frequently other words have been substituted
for those originally begun, when there
was trouble in writing them. Another explanation
of these occasional difficulties of transmission
was suggested afterward, first by
Frederick and later more explicitly by Mary
Kendal.
“Do you see us visibly?” Mrs. Bruce asked.
“Yes, of course. We see all you do, and
more. We see motives, where you see appearance.”
[Long afterward (May 26th), Mr. Kendal
asked Anne Lowe whether she could see sunsets,
and she replied: “No, but we see their
equivalent in dawn of purpose.”
[She had previously expressed approval of a
room, which had been arranged with great
care for one dear to her, and he asked whether
she saw its physical details, or only its effects
upon the minds of persons entering it, to which
her answer was: “We never see material
things. We see their significance.”
[Similarly, Mary K. said (May 31st), “We
read your thought frequently, and always perceive
motive, intention, and the mental and
spiritual significance of your reactions to material
things, in themselves unimportant. So
we say we see the thing itself, because we perceive
its essential significance.”]
Mrs. Bruce said her daughter wanted to
know whether dogs continue to exist after life
here, feeling that they must.
“They do not come as animals, exactly.
But there is no manifestation of force that is
not purpose, and purposes are united and
gather here, in ways not possible for you to
understand, in the progress toward the great
purpose.” Ten days later, Frederick stated
this more explicitly.
After a pause, Mr. Bruce said: “We are so
full of our fine but tremendous task here, at
this great moment of crisis, that I’m afraid
I’m not very entertaining. We talk shop to
you, because that is the reason we can come
so freely now.”
“You refer to the great crisis?” she asked.
“Not to our present crisis here?”
“Germany is bereft of all purpose. Purposes
of destruction have left her. She has
one sole, frantic force remaining—fear. After
that, destruction, long followed, will turn and
rend her, and fear will be lost in despair.”
“Aren’t there some good Germans?” she
suggested, adding that their daughter thought
it unfair to condemn a whole people for the
sins of some of them.
“Many good Germans have admitted to
consciousness the call of destructive purposes,
and have for the moment joined forces against
us. For many years this preparation has been
going on. No German who has ever admitted
the forces of disintegration is quite free from
them now. There were some officers who took
their own lives and faced the consequences,
rather than join forces with the dominant
purpose of their people. No person can live
in Germany now who is not party to disintegration.
No German lives in the world,
who still calls himself German, who is not
party to disintegration.”
“You say they have ‘joined forces against
us for the moment,’” I mentioned.
“Some of them will see light, and build forcefully
for true progress. Some of them will
destroy while they live. Some will be for
years deterrent, and the end is impossible to
foresee.”
A day or two after this, when I was alone,
I asked Mary K. what Mr. Bruce meant by
saying that once the call of purpose is admitted
to consciousness, there is no choice
but to answer.
“He meant that your personal struggle is
only with the purposes admitted to consciousness.
All forces are constantly trying to reach
you, to enlist you for the great struggle. Once
admitted to your consciousness, you have no
choice but to answer, and the struggle between
opposing forces is fought with your help.
Many waver between the two, now lending aid
to this one, now to that. A few choose instantly;
some to progress, some to delay,
some to build, some to destroy. This is what
men call character.”
“He said also that no German who has ever
admitted to consciousness the forces of disintegration
is quite free from them now.
Why?”
“Because there is in your life, as here, a
group loyalty. But whereas here we are
grouped by purpose, there you are grouped
largely by geographical location. And any
German who justified this war in the beginning
is party to disintegration to some extent still.
His group loyalty holds him, though his purpose
protest. That will be the final test.
Purpose, or finite loyalty to finite group.”
One or two interesting statements were
made, about this time, during an interview
with the widow of a well-known New York
surgeon.
“Your husband’s work is healing still,” Mary
K. told her. After enumerating the constructive
purposes, she continued: “Healing was
always his purpose, and he follows it still, with
all his great force. He has a freer field here,
and fulfils his purpose fully. That is the
reason he is unable to be here to-day. The
Germans are liberating many bewildered and
fear-stricken souls, and all our great healers
are held by their need.”
When we spoke of ways of finding happiness
she said: “Who fears the purpose he should
serve with force destroys it. Fear not. Find
it, serve it, and happiness of a positive kind
will find you.... Your force is scattered among
many latent purposes. Find the dominant
call of Progress to your soul, and follow that,
leaving the rest behind.”
Again, a day or two later, the present preoccupation
of healers on the next plane was
mentioned, when I asked Mary K. whether a
certain woman would come at a given time to
meet friends who had asked for her.
“She may. I shall try to have her here,”
she said. “Her work is healing, and all our
healers are working constantly.... She was
an artist with you, and somewhat deterrent.
She has found a new purpose.”
The day before the last Lessons were given,
Maynard Holt, explaining to a friend the seven
purposes, said: “Every Human being who is
for progress and construction serves one or
more of these purposes. It is by them that
what you know as human force is ultimately
grouped for eternal advance. Our effort now
is to unite all forces for Progress in conscious
co-operation.” After speaking of Germany’s
unity of purpose, he went on: “She is, and
has been for years, the center of forces and
purposes of disintegration in your life. She
is, in theological parlance, the ally of his
Satanic Majesty. We have learned here that
there is no evil, per se. There is only purpose,
constructive or destructive.... But the forces
of disintegration are gathering for a battle of
wits and morals, and we are emulating Germany
in just one thing.... We are preparing.
We want you to wake up and realize what is
going on. We want every one of you to find
and recognize not only your own purpose, but
the other fellow’s. Find out who is for progress,
and who merely camouflages disintegration.
Conscious co-operation of constructive
purpose is warranted to beat the devil. He
can’t defeat it, nor yet delay it. (O) That is
what it means to all of us.... Come on in.
The water’s fine!”
As has been said, our invisible friends have
seemed somewhat hazy in their perceptions of
time and place and of mundane details generally,
and they have shown no inclination to
concern themselves with our trivial personal
affairs. When pressed for specific statements
about small details, their replies have been
sometimes in exact accordance with the fact
as we have perceived it, sometimes not, but
they have rarely diverged widely from the
truth. In the larger matters directly related
to spiritual unity and growth they have
been correct, as when Mary K. explicitly
stated, March 23d (already quoted), that
the German offensive then in progress and
up to that time successful would ultimately
fail.
On one occasion, apropos of certain questions
her husband had asked, Mary Kendal said:
“We are not here to satisfy intellectual or any
other kind of curiosity. If we were not sure
you would use this information for construction,
we wouldn’t fuss about it—except you
and I, Manzie.”
Several times during March and April, however,
Mary K. gave me correct and specific
information about various minor affairs, and
these incidents are mentioned here because I
have been asked repeatedly whether such
statements had been made and verified, rather
than because undue importance is attached to
them.
For example, hastening to an appointment
one morning (March 29th), I carelessly left
my muff in a taxicab. Discovering the loss an
hour later, I telephoned to the cab company,
to be told that no report had been received
from the cabman, but that they would try to
locate him at one of their various stands. It
was arranged that I should call at their office
for it late in the afternoon, had it been found.
During luncheon, which I took at a restaurant,
Mary K. indicated that she had something
to say, and on the back of an envelop
wrote: “Your muff is found for you.” Two
hours later, when I reached home, the muff had
been returned by the cabman.
Another incident, less accurate in detail, but
substantially correct, concerned Mr. Kendal
and my record-book. Having had, during his
brief stay in New York, no leisure in which to
read the record—which then contained only
the genesis of this experience, Frederick’s
first interviews with his mother, and some
messages from Mary Kendal not included
in my letters to her husband—he had taken the
book away with him (March 20th), and three
or four days later I began looking for its return.
When, on the 29th or 30th (exact date
not noted), it had not arrived, I asked Mary
K. whether she knew anything about it, and
she replied that it had been sent and would
probably reach me that day. At that time
the record, wrapped and addressed, lay on his
desk, where he had left it with instructions
that it be mailed when he left home for the
Easter week-end. It had been overlooked,
and he found it there when he returned on
the following Monday. Apparently Mary K.
perceived only his intention and belief that it
was on its way to me.
On the 1st of April she told me that a letter
concerning these communications, then several
days overdue, for which I waited with great
anxiety, had at last been written.
“Really written?” I asked. “Or is this one
of those successfully started things you regard
as accomplished?”
“Really written.”
At the same time she promised me other
letters, from persons specifically named, and
gave me certain information concerning a
member of the Gaylord family.
Two days later, when none of these letters
had appeared, I said, “Where are those letters
you promised me?”
“The letters are coming, fearful and wonderful
messenger,” she humorously assured me.
“You have not made a m ... fr ... friend ...
free ... fantom (O) friend in vain.”
Laughing, I asked: “Is ‘fantom friend’
right?”
She said it was.
Half an hour later the long-delayed letter
arrived, and as she had told me, it was dated
April 1st. The other letters came later the
same day, the one from Mrs. Wylie verifying
the information already given by Mary K.
about a member of her family.
On Monday, April 1st, I sent a copy of
Frederick’s recent interviews with his mother
and sister to Mrs. Gaylord at K——, hoping
that it might reach her by Wednesday morning.
Wednesday night Mary K. told me that an
expected letter from Mrs. Gaylord had not
been written, adding: “She waits for the
record.” A week later, after a happy visit in
K——, Mrs. Gaylord returned to her home
and notified me that she had not received the
manuscript from me. Fearing that it had been
lost in the mails, I asked Mary K. about it,
and was told that it would be received. This
was repeated at intervals covering several
days.
When, on Monday, April 15th, two weeks
from the day it had been sent, it was missing
still, I told Mary K. that it must have been
lost.
“They shall have it soon,” she said. “It is
not lost, but delayed.”
“Shall I make a duplicate for them?”
“You must trust us.”
“You are positive that it will arrive?”
“Yes, it will.”
It was delivered to Mrs. Gaylord the following
day, April 16th.
On one occasion I asked Mary K. about a
woman for whom I had been requested to arrange
an interview with a person on the next
plane, but about whom I knew nothing whatever.
“She is deterrent,” was the reply, and during
the subsequent interview, for the first time
since the beginning of this experience, I encountered
an individual whose outlook and
desire was limited to the narrowly personal.
One of the most striking of these examples
of specific information occurred on the night
of Tuesday, April 2d, the day of the Senatorial
elections.
Cass said: “Ask Mary K. whether she will
answer a specific, mundane question for me.”
When she had written her name and indicated
her willingness, he inquired: “Who was elected
in Wisconsin to-day, Lenroot or Davies?”
“Are you there?” I questioned, when no
reply came.
“Yes.”
After another delay, when the pencil wandered
lightly and aimlessly, she wrote: “Lenroot.”
Supposing that she had finished, I put
the pencil aside, but she summoned me again,
to add: “Lenroot elected by latest count.
Close in some places. We consider him
elected.” Cass looked at his watch. It was
five minutes past twelve.
The next morning our papers announced Mr.
Lenroot in the lead, with final returns not yet
received, and not until Cass reached his office
did we discover how truly “exclusive” our information
had been. He learned then that
the suburban editions of several New York
City papers, which probably went to press
about the time we talked to Mary K., practically
conceded the election to Mr. Davies,
reporting him ahead by returns then available.
Of many other specific statements that were
either absolutely correct, or so nearly correct
that Mr. Kendal’s theory of a difference of
perceptive method might easily account for the
error, one is notable. On Sunday, May 19th,
I asked Mary K. whether she could tell me
anything about the projected German drive.
“Yes. It will be fierce, but futile. All
forces here see her doom, and the war will last
only as long as unsupported human endeavor
can endure against eternal purpose. Germany
has no ally here. The forces that have impelled
her for these many years are overpowered
by world-purpose, and have left Germany to
her destruction, while they prepare to destroy
the finest spiritual fruits of victory.”
Similarly, while writing to friends at the
front of our entire confidence in the outcome
of the Picardy drive then in progress, May
30th, I paused to ask Mary K. whether she
had anything more to say about the war.
“Only that we are the victors. Germany
does not win this drive, either. Our forces
rally, and the end is near. Defeat this time
will leave them despairing and afraid.”
To this Maynard Holt added, “All the forces
have withstood the blow and gather for the
final and decisive defeat of Germany.”
The actual existence of intelligent, invisible
forces, constantly doing battle for and against
spiritual progress, through possession of what
we are wont to call our souls, was at first difficult
for me to accept literally, the idea being in
direct opposition to my whole mental tendency.
While the theory was interesting, it seemed
hardly credible in its specific, individual application.
However, I was soon given a manifestation
of the strength and pertinacity of
the disintegrating forces, which—although it
ultimately strengthened my conviction, proving
highly corroborative—threatened for a time
to end this effort, as far as I was concerned.
The last two Lessons were given to me on
the 12th of April, and it had been arranged
that Mr. T——, the representative of a publishing-house,
should come on the evening of
the thirteenth for a demonstration of the communication
with the next plane. From the
day this arrangement was contemplated, frequent
assertions were made under Mary K.’s
signature, concerning Mr. T—— and his attitude
toward this experience, many of which
were afterward proved untrue, and all of
which I doubted, notwithstanding repeated
proofs, already quoted, of her general correctness
of statement. Day by day these messages
grew more confusing, and I less able to
account for them by any theory then formed.
That a deliberate “drive” by malign powers
was in progress never occurred to me, and
would have seemed too absurd to credit, even
had I thought of it.
As there seemed to be no close tie between
Mr. T—— and any of those from whom he
had expressed a desire to hear, no great eagerness
on either side to complete a circle of which
each was a part, I felt that the interview might
present difficulties not encountered before, and
resolved to do no writing during the day, reserving
my strength for the evening’s work.
In the morning, however, I had occasion to
ask Mary K. for some brief information. Beginning,
as usual, with her signature—somewhat
haltingly done—the pencil wrote quickly,
but erratically: “Mr. Farrow is dead.” This
man is a business associate of Cass’s, living
abroad.
Startled, I thought I must have taken the
message incorrectly, but it was repeated.
“Mr. Farrow is dead. Cass will hear later.”
When I insisted that this could not be true,
it was reiterated. “Yes, he is here, and b ...
blon ... latter ... bewildered. Mary K.”
Our personal relations with Mr. Farrow,
while pleasant, have never been close, being
based entirely upon a business connection, and
my affections were in no way responsible for
my resistance to this announcement, nor would
our personal affairs have been in any way influenced
by his death. But I did not believe it.
“Farrow is here with us. May ... Mary
K.” This signature was slow and irresolute,
beginning as Maynard and ending as Mary
K., but lacking the firmness of either—an indecision
and inconsequence characteristic, I
have since learned, of disintegrating force in
these invasions.
“Was he killed in an accident?”
“No. Pneumonia. Maynard. Tell Cass.”
“Shall I telephone to Cass now?”
“No. I am watching over him. Maynard.”
The use of the word “dead” in this connection
was surprising, since the whole trend of
former communications had been toward elimination
of the idea of death. Once more I
asked Mary K. if they were sure there had
been no mistake.
“Yes. He is dead to your life.”
“You mean Farrow of P——? Not his
brother? Or his son?”
“Yes, P——. It is true. You will hear
soon. Cass must go there.”
I telephoned to Cass, saying nothing of this
experience, and found him in good spirits,
proving that he had not heard of Mr. Farrow’s
death. Returning to the pencil, I told
Mary K. I did not believe the information was
correct.
“Yes, he is dead. A telegram on the way
to Cass. He will receive it soon. Before one
o’clock.”
Some time later, having heard nothing from
Cass, I told Mary K. again that there had been
a mistake.
“No, it is true. Mr. Farrow of P—— is here
with us. Cass will know in a few minutes.
He will telephone.”
I warned her then that my faith in her veracity
was at stake, and that while I could not doubt
that Frederick, Mary Kendal, Maynard Holt,
and others, had communicated through me, I
could not take the responsibility of publishing
anything she had told me unless I could trust
her in all things, adding: “If this is not true
how can I be sure that any of it is?”
“Mary K. It is true. Don’t doubt.”
I said I had no wish to doubt, but that unless
this message came from some other than
Mary K., I could not believe her again, if it
proved, as I was sure it would, to be untrue.
I began to suspect that disintegrating forces
were at work.
“It comes from the constructive force. Be
confident. It perplexes you.”
Later experience has taught me that while
either force may be in complete command at
moments, during these struggles for control,
not infrequently a message begun by one is
finished by the other. During the three days
of this first persistent attack, however, I held
no key to the mystery, and the occasional
clearly constructive and characteristic messages
from Mary K. and Maynard Holt merely added
to my bewilderment and dismay. Yet never
for one instant during those three days did I
accept the repeated statements of Mr. Farrow’s
death as true. Weeks afterward, Mary K. told
me why I was not deceived.
Since that time, too, I have learned more
clearly to distinguish personality by the degree
and quality of force applied to the pencil,
which varies greatly with individuals, though
it sometimes varies in the same individual at
different times. But in the first experience it
did not occur to me to apply that test of
identification.
All that Saturday afternoon the argument
went on at intervals, I insisting that Mr. Farrow
was not dead, the pencil reiterating that
he was.
At two o’clock Maynard said: “Believe in
us, Margaret. We can help you better.” It
is evident now that this referred to the conflict
with the disintegrating force, but at the
moment I misunderstood it and reminded him
of the many specific and inaccurate statements
made, during the past few days, regarding
the man who was coming that evening by
appointment, asking if this were more misinformation
of the same sort, to which the
reply was: “No, Farrow is here. He is dazed,
but will be taken care of.”
An hour later, I returned to the pencil, begging
them to tell me, before definite information
reached me from other sources, that there
had been a mistake.
“Mary K. You must not doubt. We shall
lose control of you if you do.” When I said
that what I sought was truth, she said: “I
know, but you doubt our control, and weaken
it.”
“I also doubt my own correctness.”
“You are correct.” As, indeed, I was. Her
message reached my consciousness.
At three o’clock the insistence that Mr.
Farrow was dead continued, and attempts were
made to explain former inaccuracies, on the
plea of a difference in plane, creating “errors
in terms of finite space.”
Shortly before five, it was said that Cass
had received news of Mr. Farrow’s death,
and was on his way home. A few minutes
later Mary K. warned me again.
“You must not doubt.... You can’t be a
messenger without faith.”
“How am I to know when you are telling
the truth and when it is error?”
“The truth is the truth, and you must learn
to differentiate between the planes.” I suspect
that she intended the last word to be
“forces,” and that control was wrested from
her before it was written.
Resenting the whole confused situation, and
entirely unable to account for my conviction
that this message was false, I said: “If Cass
tells me, when he comes home, that Mr. Farrow
is dead, I will believe anything you tell
me in future. If he is not dead, I’ll have
nothing further to do with you or your book.”
“Mary K. You will go on with our work.
He is dead.”
At this point, Cass arrived. He said that
he had received neither letter nor cablegram
from Mr. Farrow for ten days, although an
expected and important letter from him was
some time overdue. This seemed to lend
color to the report of his death, but my conviction
was unshaken.
From the beginning of these communications
with the next plane, although at times excessively
fatigued, I had enjoyed an increasing mental
serenity, but with the first announcement of
Mr. Farrow’s death, this had given way to the
peculiar nervous instability and apprehension
invariably accompanying these mischievous
invasions.
By night my mind was in a turmoil and my
nerves on edge, my confidence shaken, my
faith in the balance—which did not lessen the
difficulties of an interview prompted chiefly
by intellectual interest. Establishing connection
with an unfamiliar personality is not easy,
at best, and frequently some time is required
to obtain free communication. On this occasion,
instead of devoting the evening to perfecting
one connection, several persons were
called, all but one responding, and the messages,
with one or two exceptions, were unsatisfactory.
There were vain and fatiguing
efforts to write a name unknown to any of us,
and most of the efforts to obtain specific
evidential data were unsuccessful. Whether
this was due to my own lack of confidence,
to interference by the enemy, or to the fact
that at no time have the individuals communicating
through me concerned themselves with
personal and specific details—except occasionally,
for my own greater conviction—I do not
know.
At midnight, when this interview was over
and we were alone, although wearied to the
point of exhaustion, I asked again about Mr.
Farrow, receiving the same reply, with a variation
to the effect that the cablegram announcing
his death had been delayed by the censor, and
with occasional phrases of appeal and encouragement—merely
intensifying my bewilderment—from
Mary K. and Maynard.
“Are you sure you haven’t been away and
let in disintegrating forces?” I asked Mary K.
“No, we have been here. They can’t touch
your purpose. Don’t fear. You will be perfectly
reassured soon,” was her reply, which,
had we but recognized it, was an intimation
that disintegrating forces had been in partial
control in spite of all effort to overcome them.
Again I asked why the word “dead” had
been used, and was told: “That is what the
cable to Cass says.” Which manifestly did
not explain.
Sunday morning, Maynard Holt’s familiar
signature came at once, followed by a long,
personal message to a friend who was present,
steadily written, and pointed by an occasional
characteristic turn of phrase, indicating a clear
and uninterrupted connection.
When this had been finished, Cass asked,
“Shall I go to the office for that cable?”
“It is not there.”
“It’s all a mistake?” I urged.
“Farrow is here.”
But I knew he was not there. Had he been
present in the flesh, I could not have been
more certain that he had not left this plane.
All day we discussed the bearing of these
persistent misstatements—provided they were
misstatements—upon the experience as a whole,
and I was oppressed, in addition to my personal
disappointment, by a sense of my responsibility
to those others to whom this new
faith had brought active happiness and hope.
I had arranged to go to L—— on the following
Tuesday, to spend a few days with the Gaylord
family; Mr. Kendal expected to arrive in
New York a week or ten days later, anticipating
further communication with his wife; and
various other appointments were pending.
But though I could neither question the authenticity
of former personal communications,
nor deny the constructive quality of the Lessons,
I felt that I could not continue to act
as intermediary if it were possible for persons
like Mary K. and Maynard to lend themselves
to this sort of thing, nor could I encourage
others to hold a belief after it had become
impossible to me.
In the afternoon, Mary K. told me to go to
L—— as soon as possible. When we asked
about Mr. Farrow, Maynard’s signature preceded
the message.
“He is here. Why don’t you accept it?”
“I don’t know why I can’t,” was my reply.
“Why don’t you convince my mind, as you
have at other times? Why don’t you make me
feel it? I can’t believe it’s true.”
“You have the statement of two friends.”
“You’ve been mistaken before in specific
statements.”
“Only in those relating to dimensions of
finite space, which we are unable to gauge
accurately.”
That evening, Mary K.’s signature came
first. “You must see how foolish it was to
mistrust us,” the pencil wrote. “Mr. Farrow
is here, and Cass will learn of it soon.”
“Unless you take refuge again in that difference
of plane,” I commented, rather bitterly.
“Why don’t you remember it before, instead
of after, the error it creates?”
“Because you should not distrust us.”
“But why not encourage me to trust you by
remembering that difference of plane in the first
place?” I insisted. “Why be so explicit about
things you know may be inaccurately stated?”
“I do not deceive you intentionally. We
feel that a thing certain of accomplishment is
done, and are frequently misled into premature
statements by the strength of intention,
or purpose, or movement in a given direction.
We are accurate from our point of view, and
not always able to gauge yours.”
Admitting this to be conceivable, I said:
“Now tell me about Mr. Farrow.”
“Mr. Farrow is here with us. When Cass
gets to the office in the morning he will find
the truth.” Again the signature was hesitating
and indefinite, first Maynard, then
Mary K. I felt that neither of them wrote
it, but could not reconcile the frequent constructive
statements, urging faith and continuance
of this work, to destructive purpose,
nor could I understand why, if Mary K. and
Maynard were present, they did not warn me
of false statements by malign forces, provided
such were the case.
Monday morning, the situation was unchanged,
save that the statements were slightly
elaborated. Repeatedly I asked whether
they were not confusing Mr. Farrow with
some other member of his family, or whether
they had accepted serious illness as death.
A curious statement followed this suggestion,
under Maynard’s signature. “Farrow is
both here and there. He is here in essence,
there in body.... He is both here and there
for some time after death.”
Immediately afterward, however, when I
said that this sounded preposterous, Mary
K.’s name was written, with: “Mr. Farrow is
here. He is dead to you. Actually now dead.
Go to L—— at once.”
“I can’t go to L——, with affairs in this
state,” I told her.
“You will know soon. Wait.”
Maynard followed, with an appeal to “have
faith,” adding: “It will be clear soon.”
This went on, at intervals, until after two
o’clock, when I had promised an interview to
a woman who had not visited me before.
Fully resolved to tell her that I could take no
messages for her, I made one last attempt to
obtain the truth before her arrival—this time
with partial success.
“Maynard. It is a mistake ...”
At that moment, my guest arrived. I told
her that I might be unable to get any satisfactory
communications for her, but her daughter,
who left this plane years ago, came at
once, writing steadily and clearly, with the
exception of one brief interruption. She told
her mother of the seven purposes and their
meaning, urging her, as had all the others, to
put herself consciously in touch with constructive
purpose, and to open her mind and
spirit to those on the next plane who were
eager to work with her.
When I was again alone, I returned to the
pencil, which wrote quickly and strongly:
“Maynard. It is a mistake about Farrow.
The ...” Here again the opposing forces
evidently gained control. “Farrow here, but
not your Farrow.”
“Then why have you insisted that he was
our Farrow?”
“He led us to think so.”
I said with some emphasis that I wanted
a better explanation than that.
“Maynard. You are messenger for us only
if you trust us.”
A fortnight later, after a second, similar
experience, Mary K. told me, when I asked
about this first confused period: “We had a
terrific struggle for you then. We told you
the truth, but the other forces controlled the
pencil.... The forces of disintegration compelled
us for the moment. We were not theirs,
but they overpowered and used us.”
Early in June, while preparing this manuscript,
I asked her: “Was it you who wrote,
‘You must not doubt. We shall lose control
of you if you do’?”
“Yes. We were fighting for your faith.”
“Can you tell me why you did not explain
then—why you have never explained—that the
enemy had control?”
“We have certain limitations in conflicts
of this nature.... In actual conflict we can
only affirm. Remember that.... When attacked
by disintegrating force, the only way we
can help you is to call to your purpose and to
affirm our own. In your individual struggle we
may not interfere, even when it concerns our
work. You must believe or doubt, according
to your own choice.... We cannot tell you that
disintegrating forces threaten you, until you
have recognized them. Then we can help you
repel them. Always we call to you and try to
encourage you.... You must make your own
choice and your own deductions, and learn in
that way to discriminate between the forces
appealing to you. Details of your personal
struggles may not be explained. They are
your development.”
Knowing nothing of all this in April, however,
I insisted upon a detailed explanation of
the Farrow mystery, and again the disintegrating
forces played upon my doubt and bewilderment,
elaborating excuses for the mistake, in
Maynard’s name.
Refusing to accept any of these ingenious
but illogical assertions, I contended that they
were unfair to me, having first specifically
volunteered this erroneous information, which
they now attempted to account for by obviously
specious explanations.
“We volunteer information pertaining to the
message we have for the world through you.”
This, it will be perceived, was an affirmation
indirectly disclaiming the Farrow messages,
but I did not so recognize it, and reminded
them that they had reproached me for not
trusting them in this matter.
“You are logical within your limits,” was
Maynard’s only reply to that.
“And you still expect me to go on with your
work?”
“You have had many manifestations of our
force,” Mary K. returned. “Mr. Kendal will
show you how this occurred.”
When I mentioned, with some heat, that
some one would have to show me, as they had
asked me to shoulder a heavy responsibility in
this matter, she said: “You are puzzled and
frightened, but knowledge of our constructive
work through you should decide your action.”
Remembering how fear and grief and despair,
in certain cases, and cynical indifference
in others, had been banished from the lives
of the men and women to whom these messages
had come, I conceded the constructive work.
“Then come along and build.... You are
unable to distinguish the difficulties under
which we work. Many messengers have failed
to convey the message we have tried to give....
Many mistakes happen with the best
messengers.”
“Was this my mistake?” I asked.
“No. You make only one mistake, so far.
You shut us out by doubt. Don’t doubt.
We are all working for the same great end.”
Eventually, although far from satisfied about
the Farrow affair, I decided to go to L——,
feeling that if disillusionment must come to
the Gaylord family, it would better come now
than later, but still hoping that some explanation
would be given while I was with them.
In this I was disappointed. Not until a fortnight
later did I even begin to understand it.
But after the first interview with Frederick
at L——, I wrote Cass (April 17th): “If ever
I had any doubts about the truth of this, they
are gone! Somebody did something I don’t
understand, but this is real.”
I have given this experience in some detail,
not only because it corroborates the statements
that malevolent and crafty forces are
about us, striving to thwart progressive effort,
but because it seems also to offer at least a
partial explanation of the inconsistencies and
contradictions that long have baffled and discouraged
investigators of psychic phenomena.
Obviously, until the identity and character of
the invisible communicating personality have
been established and clearly recognized, and
the purpose prompting the communication
manifested through a series of experiments, it
is unsafe to rely upon information received in
this way. And it is equally obvious that
forces of disintegration could scarcely find a
more fruitful method of implanting in the human
mind doubt and cynicism concerning the
possibility of obtaining authentic and enlightening
revelations from planes beyond, than
by contradicting and confusing such messages,
or by deliberately misleading the applicant for
information.
Later experience brought further demonstration
of the diligence of the sinister purposes,
together with greater knowledge of ways to
defeat them.
Before beginning the Gaylord interviews
at L—— (April 17th), Mary K. asked me not to
tell the family the details of the Farrow episode.
“Are you ever going to explain that clearly?”
I asked.
“Not until you know more about these
conditions.”
That night, for the first time, I saw a photograph
of Frederick. During the year of her
grief and despair Mrs. Gaylord had been
unable to bear the added poignancy of a portrait’s
suggestion, and only when I arrived, to
manifest his actual presence in the family circle,
was the hidden photograph—a singularly lifelike
and virile reproduction—brought to light.
“Hooray!” he began, after the customary
signature. “Here we are again, all of us together
at last! Dad! (O)” It will be remembered
that this was the first time that
either his father or his younger sister, Lois,
had witnessed these manifestations. “You
have been the one I wanted most, after Mother.
The girls I knew I could get sometime, for this
is the future for everybody with purpose, and
I knew they’d come to know me again soon.
But you and Mother dearest I had to have
(O) right now. You both need this knowledge
and intercourse as much as I do. The fuller
development that comes there with age and
experience, and here—where there is no age
except experience, makes me nearer to you and
Mother in feeling and outlook than I am to
the girls and Dick. Not that I am not one
with all of you. But being here has showed
me the reasons for the things—protective, overseeing,
far-seeing things—that you stand for,
and have learned there through your experience
in that preliminary life. So we are a lot
nearer of an age than we used to be. Now we
are off together again, and there is no reason,
unless somebody backslides, why we can’t keep
step through the countless aeons of eternity....
Mother dearest, this time I sure am in.
Thank you for putting me on the mantel. I
like it. Coming home is lots happier business
now. It used to make me sorry to see you all
so sad. But this is bully!... Dad, look happy
for the boy! He’s here for keeps now.”
Mr. Gaylord had generally spoken of Frederick,
during his life here, as “the Boy.” I
had never heard him use any other name.
“Can you give your father the proof of your
presence that you give me?” his mother asked.
“Not only by writing, but by the feeling in
his heart?”
“I will in time. Remember, he hasn’t yet
grown used to this communion. It hits everybody
hard, at first, and this fluency is inconceivable
to any one who has not seen and felt
it at first hand. Give us time to get used to
it, and Dad will be as fully in touch with
me and my life as he ever was when I lived
there. The shock and grief of my supposed
departure are taking force from him still, but
he’ll see, just as you have, that I am the better
and bigger for this one great experience, and
that I never was so deeply and truly a part
of his life.... Come on, now everybody talk!
I sure do preach, but you called the turn the
other day, Mother dearest. It’s my job to
get this across, first to you who are my own,
and through you to every one you can reach.
It’s all our jobs.”
Both Mrs. Gaylord and Lois had had some
success in establishing communication with the
next plane, through the pencil—obtaining detached
words, and some names. And the
former now asked: “Where were you Sunday?
I tried to get you.”
“I had a big job, attacking a pro-German
newspaper editor in South Africa. He didn’t
give in, either, but we’ll get him yet. He
doesn’t fight openly. He poses as a Pharisee,
but he’s really pro-German, and thanks God
he is like other Germans.”
Lois asked whether there are any pro-Germans
where he is, and he replied that
disintegrating force is “pro-anything that
destroys.”
During his last illness, one of his diversions
had been to plan with his father a long journey
they were to take together when he should be
convalescent. Now, after a pause, he wrote
slowly and distinctly, as if to emphasize the
deliberation of his intention:
“Dad, do you remember that trip we were
going to take? You take it with Mother some
day, and I’ll go with you, and we’ll do all the
things we planned. And I can tell you, if
you will just let me in and listen, all the things
you want to hear. We don’t need a messenger,
you and I, but as long as I can’t get to
you any other way, I’ll use one. I can help
you actually—physically, mentally, spiritually,
materially—as for so many years you helped
me. It was due to you and Mother that I got
such a good start here. Now I am here, it is
for all of us still, as it always was. But it’s
my turn to lift a little. You carried me for
years. Let me come in again now, as a real,
existing, active, growing force—your son, sir,
wanting to be nearer and more intimately
yours than ever. You go on and take our trip,
and I promise I’ll go with you. Frederick.”
A little later, he said: “I wish there could
be any way of showing you visibly the radiant
force I am, now that we are all united. You
have to be translated to this plane before you
can understand what it means to be brought
back into the family circle. Not all families,
but ours. We are all of kindred purposes, and
there’s no separating us.”
“I wish you’d do some of your ‘stunts’ for
Father,” Lois suggested.
“All right. If you want stunts, here is my
best one.” This was written briskly, upside
down and backward from my position. “Dad,
this is the way I wrote the letter to you and
the girls. Here’s another, with my love and
greeting. I said I’d do this with trimmings.
This is the beginning.”
We gave him fresh paper, and he wrote rapidly,
in winding circles, starting at the edge of
the table and finishing at the center: “Now I’ll
do it this way, all around the family circle.
All of you in, and I am not left out.” Diagonally
across the whole in bold script, “Frederick.”
In moving the paper again, it was torn a
little. Mr. Gaylord made some suggestion as
to the way it should be handled, and Lois
humorously complained that he was “always
interfering with other people’s purposes.” Beginning
at the upper right-hand corner of the
table, Frederick wrote along the edges, and
then in circles toward the center, as indicated
in the diagram:
“Don’t you mind, Dad. Let them laugh.
You and I will be laughing at them presently,
from all four points of the compass.” Again
his name was signed diagonally across the
whole.
“I always did like circuses, and I can be a
four-ringed one now, all by myself, if I have
a sympathetic audience,” was his next achievement,
done once more in circles from edges
to center, but this time his name was signed
in the center, in small script, surrounded by a
flourish.
When again a clear surface offered, he drew
a large circle around the edge of the table—the
symbolism of which, curiously, occurred
to none of us until the next day—and then ran
to the center, to circle toward the edge:
“All of us together again, and all being happy
in the consciousness that this is real and
eternal union, and that from now on we are
going to keep our family circle intact.”
Some one suggested that unquestionably he
was keeping his promise to “do it with trimmings,”
and in an intricate pattern, impossible
to describe clearly, he replied: “Sure! I’m
doing all the trimmings I can think of, and
after a minute or two I’ll think of more.”
By this time the astonishment and curiosity
aroused by these performances had perceptibly
lowered the emotional pressure, and the interview
again proceeded more normally.
Not unnaturally, in this first family reunion
Frederick’s messages were chiefly personal. Frequently,
in pauses, he made enthusiastic little
circles, as has been his custom from the first,
and I asked him whether it was the circle of
infinity, all-inclusive.
“Yes, partly. Put out all disturbing factors
and all forces of disintegration, add more to
eternity and infinity—and that is the circle.”
“Good night,” he said, a little later. “I’ll
stay here to-night and as long as Margaret
stays. You’ll talk often, won’t you?”
The next night, he began with a suggestion
that the rest do the talking, adding: “I’ll
listen and answer questions.” After some discussion
of purpose, in its personal application,
and inquiries concerning other members of
the family on his plane, Mr. Wylie asked
whether his grandfather could talk to him in
this way.
“I can get him, I think, by to-morrow,”
Frederick replied. “He’s sheltering a lot of
poor, undeveloped wretches who have come
out of conditions not making for fitness or
growth. He teaches, and urges, and offers
them opportunity, and is too busy and helpful
to come away often.”
After this had been written, I was told that
this man, during his earthly life, had devoted
time and money to providing opportunity for
others; never offering charity, but building
roads that the unemployed might have work,
exchanging some commodity needed by a poor
man for some other of which he had enough
and to spare, and always encouraging his less
fortunate fellows to retain and develop their
self-respect.
Of another on his plane, now a healer,
Frederick said: “I haven’t seen him. Every
healing force here, as with you, is occupied
with war-stricken forces. They come so dazed,
and sometimes terrified—and almost always
startled, if they come from battle. And all our
healing forces are required every minute.”
This reminded Mrs. Gaylord of an experience
of her own, a few days before, when her
pencil had written detached words, suggestive
of battle. “Lost ... many lost ... another
dead ... shot ...” etc. She asked whether
this came from a friend, and was answered in
the negative. To her inquiry, “Did you live
here?” the reply was: “Near.” She asked
for the name, and it was written clearly,
“K——.” A few days later the name of
Lieutenant K——, of a neighboring city,
headed the American casualty list.
“K—— caught his one chance before his
consciousness dimmed,” Frederick commented.
“He is now too bewildered to talk. Just after
what people who don’t know call death, there
is a moment of singular clarity and vision.
He happened to catch you in that moment.”
We fell to wondering, then, whether these
messages could be flashed to us from a distance,
or whether the person communicating
must be present, and I asked Frederick whether
he could send me a message from a distance.
“No, but we travel in a flash.”
We who had had some experience in receiving
these communications spoke of the fear we all
had lest we might unconsciously influence the
pencil, at times, to write our own imaginings.
“You people have such a fear of imagining
things that you shut out a lot we try to tell
you,” Frederick interpolated. “We can’t get
through doubt, bitterness, resentment, or selfish
grief. Fear can be conquered, but doubt
shuts the door in our faces. Please relax a
little of this too rigid vigilance, and at least
entertain the idea we are trying to put over.”
“Do I shut things out by too much vigilance?”
I asked.
“You bet you do! But you do it for the best
of reasons. You can’t take chances of giving
the wrong message.”
To a question about the desire of others on
his plane to communicate with those here, he
replied: “They are all eager to get in touch,
just now. Every one of us here is pulling
every thread of connection he can there, because
this is a critical time and because never
before in the world’s history have so many
people been reaching out for the thing that
means co-operation and progress, in the biggest
and broadest sense, if we can only reach
them and convince them that we are all working
together, and that we here can help if
they will let us.”
Mr. Wylie spoke of some one whose “make-up,”
he thought, might enable him to receive
these communications.
“Make-up has a lot to do with it,” Frederick
returned, “but the peculiar quality of following
accurately a thought put forth by a force
so subtle that science has failed to detect it is
a thing that none of you recognize until it has
demonstrated itself.”
Some one asked about a prominent politician,
whom Frederick had known well in this life,
and he replied: “—— is working his way back
to a place in the forces of Production. He had
a great opportunity, and used it for personal
ends, and now he is learning how to use it
for Progress. He is not destructive, nor even
deterrent. He is a fine force, delayed a
little.”
“Have you ever seen my mother and father?”
Mr. Gaylord asked, thereby eliciting the most
rapidly written communication—with the possible
exception of one coming the next night—that
I have ever taken, the force moving the
pencil being so strongly applied, at moments,
that the instrument was almost pulled out of
my fingers.
It should be explained that in this appeal
to his father Frederick was addressing neither
reluctance nor doubt, but a certain mental
tensity, resulting from deep emotion, deeply
repressed.
“Yes, I had Grandmother at Mrs. Z——’s
one day,” he began. “She is very anxious to
talk to you, but she has gone on to a life, or
a plane, beyond the one I am on, and I can’t
always reach her. I hope to get her some
time before Margaret goes home.... She
never wholly left you, any more than I have.
She tried for years to tell you she was there,
and she wants to come back as soon as possible
and tell you herself that there is no
death, no separation, no cause for pain, or
grief, or fear, or sadness of parting, except as
it is made in the hearts of those who do not
know the truth.
“We are nearer to you than you are to each
other, Dad, and we can prove it, if you will
let go of yourselves and take hold of us. We
want to come to you. We do come to you.
We try and try to tell you that there is nothing
to grieve about, nothing to dread. Only
love, and hope, and growth, and beauty of
completer union. But we can’t do it alone.
We must have a free heart, a free mind, a free
hope to come into. Give us that, and we will
show you that we are more truly your own—not
your own flesh and blood, but your own
purpose and force, which was one in the beginning,
and will inevitably be one in the end.
We want to make it one now. Don’t you,
Dad? Won’t you try to let the bars down and
take us in? We’ll come, and we’ll all be happier
than you’ve ever been in all your life yet,
because the Eternal Purpose is Unity, and we
can begin it right here and now, if you there
will join us and be part with us, as we with
you, of the glorious and happy and (O) irresistible
movement toward the great end—which,
after all, is not an end, but an eternal
and infinite growth toward bigger things.
“It is a big gospel we are giving you, sir;
a man’s gospel; a gospel of hope and beauty
and construction. And I am asking you to
let me come in again to your every-day life,
to let the dread and misgiving and unhappiness
go, to think of us here—all of us who are yours—as
still yours, still with you, still loving and
working and hoping with you and for you;
and if you can do that, I promise you we shall
all be happier than any of us have ever been
before.
“You see, sir, we are all of the forces of
Progress. We are all for Light, and Building,
and Justice, and Truth, and when one of us
holds back we are all held back. This is the
first time it has been possible to tell you all
this. This is the first time we have been able
to reach you freely, in a way you could not
mistake. But the people who have preached
the gospel of happiness as a curative force have
not been entirely wrong. They have not been
wholly right. But the forces here cannot possibly
affect a tense and resisting mind as they
can a relaxed and receptive one. And the
forces here are potent and eager and ready.
You know that must be true, because I am
one of them, and the only change in me—absolutely
the only one, Dad—is that I have
left the limitations of the flesh behind and
grown in perception and knowledge. I am the
same Boy,[8] plus the better things, and minus
the limitations.
“Grandmother is the same, too—plus. She
is sweeter, finer, broader, more loving, than
when you knew her. Just as she was, but expanded,
irradiated, deepened. That’s all that
death means, so you see it isn’t death at all,
nor separation, nor anything but beauty, and
greater love, and wider opportunity, and higher
ideals to live to.
“This is what we want to share with you.
We can, now. You can have a little of our
knowledge, while still in that preliminary life.
You can help us and yourselves by realizing
and living the purpose that is ours. You
have always lived it, but you haven’t always
recognized it. Do that, recognize it, recognize
us, let us in as recognized and essential parts
of your life and hope and happiness, and I
shall not need to tell you that this is a true
gospel. You will have proved it for yourself.
“Your son always,
“Frederick.”
We were all deeply moved. After a little,
Mr. Gaylord asked: “Is there anything more?”
Frederick began making circles, and his
mother said: “He’s so happy!”
“Happy isn’t the word for it! I’m personified
radiance and bliss! There isn’t anything
more to-night, except my love to all of you,
always—and to-morrow, and the next day,
and all the days to come, we are reunited and
indivisible. That’s enough, isn’t it, sir? Good
night. Frederick.”
The next day, that grandfather for whom
Mr. Wylie had asked came briefly, discussing
purpose, like the rest.
“I didn’t half understand my own impulses
there,” he said, “but I know now that the
best thing a man can do for other men—and
for himself, too—is to give them a chance to
develop whatever is in them. Sometimes it
isn’t much, from the point of view of the intelligent
man, but the fact remains that it is
force, and the more quickly it is developed the
more quickly the sum of the whole will be
raised.”
He closed more personal assurances by saying:
“There may be no way to put it into
words, but you may be sure I am watching,
and helping, and being helped, too, by your
reaching toward our common purpose.”
When Frederick had taken over the pencil
again, Mrs. Gaylord spoke of the long message
to his father the night before, to which he
replied: “It was only a beginning. This thing
we have to tell you can’t be given, nor yet
accepted, in a day or a month. That letter
last night was a sort of foreword, just to get
us all started even. The proof of the pudding
is coming later.”
Some more or less personal discussion followed,
during which Mr. Gaylord asked whether
certain arrangements he contemplated making
were wise.
Frederick replied that they were, as far as
he could see, adding: “This is hardly a time
for making permanent arrangements, for while
the end of the war is certain, the economic
conditions with you, following the war, are
impossible now to foresee. We have no way
of knowing how that struggle between labor
and capital, power of foundation and power of
development, will end. That is one of the
reasons we are so eager to get all forces for
true progress united now. There are thousands
of laboring men misled. Get them in for our
work. There are hundreds of employers ignorant
or indifferent. Turn them out.”
Mr. Gaylord, who had not at that time read
the Lessons carefully, interpreted this as championship
of the cause of labor as opposed to
capital. Some one else suggested that every
one, employer or laborer, who was not for
united progress, should be “turned out.”
“Sure,” Frederick answered. “Turn out
the unions, as they work now. Get in unity,
regardless of class.”
When Mrs. Gaylord inquired about a member
of her own family, he replied: “He has
gone on, and I haven’t seen him. To some
of us here there comes a lessening of interest
in your life, and an intensified feeling of the
importance of work beyond your plane. He
has this interest, I hear, and very rarely comes
back now. There is a lot I want to tell you
some time about the differences and conditions
of the many planes, but I can’t do it now.
The first work of those of us who have still
close ties there is to give you all we can of
the possibilities and meaning of the life you
live. Some day I’ll tell you what I can of the
life ahead, which as yet I only aspire to.”
“I suppose there’s no use asking whether
you inhabit space, or planes, or stars?” Lois
inquired.
“There are things that I can tell you later
about those matters of plane and future progress,”
he said, “but there is so much that is
more imperative now that I am told not to
tell more, at present, than the immediate needs
of your life require.”
“Do you feel any depression, when you
realize the immensity of the universe and the
smallness of each individual?” was the next
question.
“That’s a thing you’ve got to learn. There
is no force that is not true force, and no atom
so small that its weight doesn’t count. If one
atom is for destruction, that means two atoms
lost to construction, the one that is against
us and the one that balances it here, without
any forward movement.”
“Have you seen my father?” Mr. Gaylord
asked.
“No. He is a healer now, and has come
back from the plane beyond to help the newly
arrived find their balance. I have tried to
get in touch with him, but he is busy and I
haven’t yet met him, but still hope to. Few
come back for any work here, and their greater
knowledge makes them very much in demand,
just as a great surgeon is with you in times
like these.”
Again the talk turned into more personal
channels, and Mr. Gaylord asked a specific
question, affecting future arrangements.
“... Your choice will be influenced, probably,
by many considerations, as choice must always
be in your life.... I can influence you in ways
I can’t define in words, but I can’t properly
tell you how to choose—as you know better
than I. You taught me that, and it’s true.
Every fellow on his own feet.... Not that I’m
not eager to help, sir. You understand that,
don’t you? But the way I can help most is
by a close and constant association and suggestion,
that still stops short of definite expression
of choice for you. That is your
privilege. Mine is to help you see the way
more clearly.”
“Do you know what we are thinking, at
all times?”
“Not always. We read most of the thought
of the sympathetic forces, and some of everybody’s.
I can’t always answer the thought I
read, though I can sometimes. But Margaret
keeps up such a stiff guard, I can’t always get
over a thing she doesn’t know is asked.”
I said I was sorry for that, and did not understand
it, as I thought I had lowered all guards
as far as he was concerned.
“You can’t understand all the barricades—and
the limitations, too—of consciousness.
Sometimes I sneak one through on you, but
you are from Missouri, all right! You want to
see the works before you admit the applicant.”
After dinner, we talked a little about the
publication of these communications, and of
the extent to which personal messages should
be quoted.
As soon as we gave him opportunity, Frederick
said: “You people can’t guess what it
means to hear you talking about me, in the
old, happy way. I’ve missed myself terribly,
you know.... You’ve been talking about the
book. If you’ll permit a suggestion from me,
the plan of copious quotation from all the
interviews that have bearing on the big message,
as well as some characteristic extracts
from the more personal messages, under initials
frankly substituted for real ones, is to my
notion the way to do it.... A good deal of
what we have been allowed to say was because
this message was given through Margaret,
and the rest of us have told things that
illumine and carry on the message for the world.
We have all wanted you of our own to know
these things, but the channels through which
this has come to her have been chosen for her
fuller conviction, and to enable her to deliver
this with greater force.”
In this connection, it is interesting to note
that in every instance when messages of importance
have come, it has been during intercourse
primarily requested by those gone
before, who have asked me to send for the person
here through whose co-operation the freest
communication could be established—Frederick
writing more fluently to some member of
his family than to me alone, Mary Kendal to
Mansfield, David Bruce to his wife, and so
on. Conversely, interviews arranged at the
instigation of persons on our own plane have
been generally without satisfactory result.
“We who can tell it clearly, and whom she
can absolutely identify,” Frederick went on,
“have had extraordinary fluency, and almost
unlimited authority to speak. We have spoken
to our own, and through them to all who will
listen. Keep the personal part of all we have
said as sacredly to yourselves as you like, but
my own desire is that the parts of my messages
that will carry conviction or comfort to people
suffering in ignorance of all this may be given
to them through you—as your faith and conviction
will lead you to do, I know—not in your
name or mine, but in the spirit of light, healing,
and progress we all serve.”
When this was construed as an intimation
that he did not want his name used, he returned:
“I have no slightest objection. I
have only a feeling that this personal revelation
belongs to you. Use it as you choose.
I do not ask anything, except that you share
its essence with those who suffer as you have
suffered. Give them what will relieve them,
and do it as you think best.”
At this point, the question of publication
was dropped, though he returned to it the
next day. A short pause followed. Then the
touch on the pencil changed, Frederick’s bolder
writing being succeeded by a smoother, more
flowing, and exceedingly rapid script, in a
message to Mr. Gaylord from his mother, for
whose early death he had never ceased to
grieve.
“—— dear, this is Mother.
“Frederick told me I could reach you at last.
I have had always the greatest desire to touch
you, to tell you that your mother could not
leave you, could not cease to love you, could
not leave off watching over you, hoping for
you, guarding your highest hopes and ideals.
To have known the darkness that fell upon
you, and to be unable to lighten it, or to
soothe your anguish, made me as sad as one
can be in this fine and everlastingly expanding
life. I knew that you must some day come
back to me, and into full knowledge of all that
eternal life means, so I could bear it.
“You have been always a joy and a source
of great happiness to me, in your splendid
adherence to the things we know now to be
the first and fundamental principles of life.
We did not know, when I was with you, all
the wonders and beauties of the eternal life
we talked about. We thought heaven was
quite different from this. But it is heaven,
in a much higher and finer way than anything
we dreamed of then, and to be able to
come back to you now—to my boy, through
his boy—and tell you all this, is almost as
wonderful and blessed to me as it is to you.
“I have gone on to a life and a work I cannot
easily explain to you now. I have lost
touch with the material things of your life.
But you, your purpose, your achievement of
force, the love you have never ceased to give
me, the love with which you bless and are
blessed by your family—all these things I know,
dear, and have always known.
“For so long, I tried to tell you not to grieve.
We have been so close together, in the ways
that are real and infinite. Never grieve again,
dear son, for any loved one coming to this
happy life. We do not leave you. We do
not part in any way, except the way of flesh.
We are happy, but can be so much happier if
you know us with you and of you, and if you
can come to us in confidence and love and
conviction of our life, as we never cease to go
to you.
“Your father wanted me to tell you this is
from him as well as from me. He is doing
a great work and cannot come to you now, but
he knew that I should soon come to say this,
and he wants you to know that he, too, is
happier in your growing knowledge of our unceasing
life, and unceasing love, and unceasing
upward growth.
“Your family are all dear to us as part of
you, and therefore part of us. It is a light
increasing the light in which we dwell, to be
at last in this close communion with you. I
will come again some time—many times—and
I want you always to think of me as loving
you, keeping watch over you, and living in
you and yours.
“Frederick is splendid. You know that.
Please be as sure that I am—and your father,
too—always so full of happiness in the thought
and knowledge of you and your love.
“Your loving Mother.”
“I am with all of you as I never could be
before,” Frederick said, the next day, “because
until we are realized and recognized the
communion can’t be complete. Now I can tell
all of you lots of things you can get without
words or messenger. Sometimes you will
know they are my suggestions, sometimes you
won’t. But the fact that I am closely and intimately
in touch with you is the important
thing for all of us. The recognition of my definite
suggestion will come later, when you are
more accustomed to all this and have learned
the little signals by which I identify myself
to you.”
“Can you tell us what those signals are?”
some one asked.
“They are like the force I am, too subtle for
scientific analysis or description, but you’ll know
them, all of you. This thing can’t be developed
in a minute, you know. Wait, and watch, and
let the bars down, and you’ll know me when I
come, in a comparatively short time.”
“Can you tip tables with us?” Lois inquired.
“Yes, probably; but that’s a clumsy way
of doing it. Some of you can run a planchette.
None of you are likely to get anything like
this.... This fluency of reception is hardly to
be expected. We can talk, however.... You
can always get me, for the essential intercourse,
and somehow we’ll get it across.”
“I want you to give your father something
like the ‘stop—look—listen’ reminder to me,”
his mother said.
“All right; but I can’t do it in cold blood.
Let me cogitate, and I’ll try to think up a
password that can’t fail to accomplish the
desired effect. You and Dad are the same
purpose in essentials, but your force is differently
applied and can’t be approached in
the same way.”
“How far down in the scale does the possession
of a soul go?” Mr. Wylie asked, presently.
“How about animals?”
“There is no such thing as soul, in that sense.
All purpose is force. All force personified is
individuality. All individuality is eternal. The
development is unequal. The undeveloped
force finds quicker development here. But the
force that has been developed to a point of
intelligence in your life, and is not actively
put to work, goes down in the scale, is deterrent,
and has to work just as hard to get back
as the force that never has developed at all.”
“Where does the force animating babies
come from?” I asked. “What was little Dick
before he was little Dick?”
“That’s what I want to explain, if I can.
The force that manifests itself in animals is
a grade higher in force than the vegetable
manifestation, and that higher than inanimate
stone and metal. The force of an animal comes
here, to swell the forces that become individual
and human through birth, but individuality
begins with human consciousness. All force
that is not human may eventually become
human, but there is no persistence of individuality
until birth as a human and more or
less productive force begins it. Animals do
not produce anything but their kind. Only
man creates, and that is the eternal attribute.”
“Is there a struggle between purposes to
enter a new-born human?”
“Many purposes are latent in every human
being from birth. None is in absolute possession.
Life on your plane is one perpetual
struggle between the eternal warring purposes.
No newly born child has chosen. The training
of a child should, from the first, be a preparation
for battle, for daily—almost hourly—choice.
Diligence, vigilance, purpose to work
unceasingly and against all disintegrating influences,
determination to construct and to
progress in spite of anything, mental, moral,
physical, or material—these are the essential
things in training a child to live forcefully and
eternally.”
“What becomes of babies who die at birth?”
“They have undeveloped personalities and
are developed here. We have strong forces of
Light and Truth devoted to their teaching.”
“When a man is consciously determined to
construct, is he ever overcome by disintegrating
forces?”
“Sure thing he is, if he doesn’t fight. Sometimes
he sways and recovers. Read the Lessons.
They’ll tell you more every time you
read them. They come from General Headquarters....
The arousing force of this message
is to be measured by conviction manifested
in action. Again you are respectfully
referred to the Lessons.”
“It doesn’t seem fair that physical and
nervous conditions should affect one’s ability
to resist or receive the forces,” Lois mentioned.
“It doesn’t. You just think it does. The
forces of construction are always eager to
come in. The thing you call nervous exhaustion
generally comes from yielding to forces
of disintegration. A person yields to one or
more of them, and then is sorry for himself
because some doctor doesn’t rout them. What
he needs is to buck up and kick them out himself.”
Evidently he referred here to the nervous
disorders arising from mental disturbances,
for the next day he emphasized the government
of physical forces by physical laws.
It was suggested that while many nervous
disorders might be controlled in their incipiency
by the person suffering from them, they eventually
get beyond his control, and Frederick
replied: “You think so; but there’s always
force where there’s personality, and if it can
just be put up to you, by yourself or another,
that the choice in the end is yours and nobody’s
else, you can help yourself. In the end, you
help yourself, anyhow, unless you slide back
to protoplasm of purpose. Get busy and buck
up, or backslide and slump. It’s up to every
fellow for himself, and every one who slips
back impedes the way for somebody else.”
In the talk following this, some one spoke
of the constant teaching of brotherhood and
regard for one’s neighbor as a vicarious gospel.
“Not vicarious,” Frederick corrected. “It
is not vicarious to give the other fellow a chance.
No man is his brother’s keeper. No man has
a right to impede construction, unless he’s
destructive. But it’s every personality developed
to its highest that makes the strong
constructive army. The weak should have a
chance to develop, but no strong force should
yield its purpose. Nothing vicarious about
that. Just common sense and good organization.”
Mr. Gaylord—the successful head of a large
manufacturing concern—asked, with a twinkle:
“Can you successfully run a business in accordance
with the principles laid down in these
Lessons? Before you answer, I want to say
that I believe it can be done.”
“You’re right, Dad. It can’t be done easily,
nor quite consistently, at present, because of
the complexity of modern business conditions.
You are all bound to some extent by association
with some one else, whether by a man, a
directors’ board, an association, or a contributing
concern. These all limit, to a certain
extent, your freedom of action; but fundamentally
the principle is practicable, and can
gradually be put into consistent practice by
uniting with those of your own purpose, instead
of with those who seem expedient.”
That evening, Mrs. Wylie said that the repeated
assertions of invisible forces of construction
and of destruction, alertly striving
to influence us, reminded her of the old theories
of guardian angels and possessing devils.
I think it was that night, too, though I
made no record of it at the time, that Mr.
Gaylord said, when Frederick’s good night had
been followed by his customary signature: “I
wish he’d sign the name I used to call him
by.” Efforts to obtain it then, however, were
unsuccessful.
The next day—the last of my visit—Frederick
said of a man of whom we had been
talking: “He hasn’t just found himself yet,
but he will. He likes to produce some things,
and he will respond to the higher call to build
for the higher end. You can all help him,
and yourselves, and our whole purpose, by
calling to the latent builder in him. He wants
to come in, but doesn’t know just where to
start.... More effort, more concentration,
more force applied for purpose, is the thing to
strive for first. I can’t tell him how to build.
That’s for him to choose.... You can build
together. Each of you helping the other, each
of you bringing effort, willingness, perception,
force of various kinds. But first and foremost,
devotion to the purpose of progress, regardless
of intervening difficulties and discouragements.
Habit is strong in every human force. Remember
that, and watch—watch for the little
masquerading devils of destruction. They are
clever and subtle, and come in plausible guise.
Kick them out and work.... You said this
sounded like the old stories of possession by
devils, Sis. It’s not that. The devils of old
possessed a man in spite of himself. The
forces of destruction govern him only when
he permits them to. He can always be constructive,
if he will. He may do no more than
carry bricks to the mason, but still he builds.
The man who has great opportunity must use
it greatly. The little chap can use only the
force he has. Thus endeth this preachment.”
Lois asked whether he had been present at
a moment when several members of the family
had been in great physical danger, and he replied
that he had come at once, from a great
distance, in response to a summons from a
force “that is always with you when I am
not.”
“There is always a connecting force between
you and the free forces here,” he explained.
“We are always in touch that way. That is
equally true of the forces for destruction. The
greater forces for good or evil can be instantly
summoned to reinforce your choice.”
This led to a discussion of prayer, in which
certain members of our group had lost faith.
“You can always summon help, if you call
the (O) eternal constructive forces to build
with you,” he told us. “But most people
pray for physical or material aid. Physical
forces follow physical laws. Forces of eternity
affect them to some extent, but do not govern
them. Prayer with other people is a sort of
lying down on the Infinite and giving up personal
effort. The prayer that is most truly
and promptly answered is the one that begins
and ends with a determination not to yield
to weakness, or fear, or the other disintegrating
powers. Prayer implies an open mind, and
is too often made with a closed one. Not wilfully
closed, but fearfully, and therefore not
truly open.”
“Physical forces, Mother, were too much
for my physical resistance,” he said, when she
spoke of her effort to hold him here. “No
amount of prayer, or influence of the forces of
eternal progress, could affect that, beyond the
extent to which it was affected. That is the
reason it was a long fight. The forces helped
all they could. But the physical thing is a
minor thing, after all. The eternal thing is
all that really counts. And to be able to put
you, whom I love so much, in touch with the
eternal while still in that preliminary life, is
worth all that I—and you—went through to
make it possible. To be able to pass on this
knowledge to that life of yours is worth anything.”
“Isn’t the time coming when we shall be
able to control our physical condition better
than we do now?” Mrs. Wylie asked.
“Yes, the mind—and what we call force in
the eternal sense—has great influence over
personal physical force. It performs no miracles,
but prevents much yielding to what is
really the forces of destruction, trying to hamper
and delay accomplishment of any constructive
kind.... The forces of disintegration
are the busy boys, and it takes force and purpose
and struggle to keep them out.”
“Is our decision to use your first name in
the book right?” his father asked.
“Yes, sir. I am very happy about that. It
will identify me, and therefore the message,
to many people I should like to reach personally,
and will not identify you to the public at
large. I should not like to have Mother and
the girls annoyed by publicity, but that was
for you to choose. The message, as you know,
is important and general. But to a lot of
fellows I want to reach, Frederick will carry
where Z. X. would fail to convince.... Your
attitude about the book pleases me, too....
You and I both know the force of the primitive
masculine feeling that a man’s family is
his own, and its affairs private and personal.
This time, the personal affair is also the eternal
affair, vital and illuminating. And the fact
that I have been one of the channels through
which this came, that it was the search for me
that made Margaret begin this work, must not
be confused in anybody’s mind with the fact
that the message is more than a message—it
is a revelation. For that reason, you and I
both will gladly sink the personal reluctance
and remember the purpose we serve.”
A long pause ensued, while we sat soberly
about the table, waiting. Then some one
suggested that perhaps he wished us to ask
questions.
“All I want is to talk like folks to the
family,” he announced, with a force and rapidity
amounting to emphasis. “For the love of
Mike, stop thinking of me as different, and
translated, and serious, and solemn! I do
preach a lot, I admit. That’s for reasons you
know. But I’m just as fond of a joke as I
ever was, and I refuse to be set aside as a
superior being! Come on, now, count me in
as the Boy, and out as a thing to be treated
with solemn reverence! I’m myself, and I
want it recognized!”
After this, the talk drifted, much as it might
have done had he returned visibly after a
long absence, touching here and there.
Presently Lois asked, referring to a friend
in Europe: “Did you know H—— was married?
And to an American woman?”
“No, I didn’t know that. He should marry
a free force, like an American girl. He was
too blamed medieval in his feeling about females.
We are all a bit inclined that way, we
men, but American women are doing a lot to
free force, the world over. They are more
nearly free in purpose than any other women
in the world, more truly individuals—when
they don’t abuse it, and turn into dolls.
American girls help women everywhere. They
don’t stand for any harem stunts. H—— will
learn a lot of things he needs to know, if she’s
the real thing.”
Concluding a long reply to a personal question
of his father’s, he said: “Know that I
am enjoying every pleasure you take, doubly,
once for you and twice for myself. There’s
your watchword, Dad! One for myself, and
two for the Boy. Remember that every time
you are worried, every time you are tempted
to overwork, every time you put off physical
repairs, every time you feel depressed, every
time you need rest and relaxation and pleasure,
every time you play with Mother and the
girls, every time you renew your fellowship
with other men—always remember: One for
myself, and two for the Boy.”
That evening, Mrs. Gaylord said that she
had received a message about a relative in
the West, purporting to come from her brother
on the next plane, which she thought was not
true, but one of her daughters told her that a
letter received the night before had verified it.
“Mother dearest, all messengers have that
trouble,” Frederick warned her. “There are
certain things concerning details of your plane,
that will come to you through forces around
you, that get confused in transmission.
That’s as near as I can come now to explaining
what happens. Some day, I can perhaps
tell you more about it. But don’t let that disturb
or discourage you. The explanation is as
natural as a deflected ray of light, or an electric
current grounded.[9] It is a part of the
conditions under which we work with your
plane, and is never encountered regularly or
continuously. Certain detached experiences
of that sort come to every messenger. This
one you mention was not one of them, but I
tell you this now, because the experience may
come to any of you, including Margaret, any
day. The current gets mixed. That’s the
best way I can express it. But it doesn’t persist
for any length of time.”
We talked about the force moving the
pencil. Mr. Gaylord asked whether I wrote
the words, after receiving the message through
my mind, and I replied that the force, on the
contrary, seemed to be applied to the pencil
from without—sometimes above my fingers,
sometimes below them—my only participation
being to hold the pencil upright and to follow
its movement. Mrs. Wylie mentioned the
theory that the message comes through the
subconscious mind, the muscles of the hand
supplying the motive power. We asked Frederick
whether he could tell us anything about it.
“The subconscious mind is like the battery,”
he said, slowly, “but the connection is made
through the hand. The motive power for the
pencil does not come, as scientists claim, from
the subconscious mind, but from the subtle
force I mentioned, put into connection with
the hand by certain sympathetic and sensitive
conditions of the subconscious mind. The
comparison is not exact. The force is not
electric, and has certain definitely distinctive
qualities not to be expressed in any terms
now familiar to your plane; but in time words
will be found—or coined—to express this connection.”
Some weeks afterward, Mr. Kendal obtained
a little additional information about
this unknown force from his wife.
In endeavoring to establish communication
with Frederick, through a pencil, one of his
sisters had been overwhelmed by insistent, and
frequently unknown, personalities seeking expression,
and had had some rather violent and
annoying manifestations of the force they
employ.
“You mustn’t do too much of this writing
stunt,” Frederick now advised her, “unless you
give up a lot of other things. You can’t burn
your candle of force at both ends. Margaret
gave up a lot of outside activities long ago.
You are sensitive, and could do this in time
very freely, but the receptivity is decidedly a
strain upon the messenger at best, and if any
amount of writing is to be done, you can’t
do other things, too.” After mentioning that
she would probably be beset by “any number
of yearning forces,” he added: “So either say
‘not at home’ to anybody but Uncle J—— and
Bud ...”
I halted the pencil, supposing that he had
intended to write either Boy or Brother, and
that there had been a mistake in transmission.
Lois glanced at the sheet, and ejaculated:
“Buddie!”
“That’s the name I’ve been waiting for!”
her father exclaimed.
The pencil then went on, completing the
name as if no interruption had occurred:
“... die, or give up other things, or quit.”
Afterward, when it had been explained that
certain members of the family had called
Frederick Buddie, Bud, or Buzz, variations
of Lois’s baby attempts at Brother, he added:
“I’ve been trying to get that through, but
the Missourian held me to known names.”
At first, names came to me with little difficulty,
but latterly—possibly beginning with
the Annie Manning episode—I have been generally
unable to transmit them. Some one
asked Frederick the reason for this.
“Because names are specific,” he said.
“She knows my name. She knew I had a
special name, besides. But while an idea expressed
in familiar words can be transmitted,
however unfamiliar the idea, the definite and
specific spelling of an unfamiliar name is very
difficult to get through, especially if the messenger
is a little nervous about it, or constantly
alert for possible mistakes. We can sometimes
get it through, as I did this, in a rush of
other stuff.”
[A few days later, when I was very tired,
receiving with difficulty, and therefore questioning
every statement made through the
pencil, Mary K. said: “You are the most mentally
... el ... elas ... el ... elastic is not
the word. Means elastic and masterful ...
impregnable messenger I ever tried to work
through.... That is the reason names are almost
impossible to send through you. You
try to get them, but the almost invincible
character of your mental resistance to deception
makes it difficult for us to penetrate where
a doubt exists in your mind. A name is specific
to the highest degree, and resistance, however
unconscious and unrecognized, prevents
its free transmission.”]
“You will come again, won’t you?” Frederick
asked, as the hour of my departure approached.
“I have had a bully time talking
to the family, and I can do better work now,
because they are all happier, and all with me
in conscious purpose. It’s true that every
bit of conscious co-operation with us helps
us, as well as you. So that ‘One for myself
and two for the Boy’ is not bunk, Dad. It’s
the real thing, for both of us.”
With a final brief message to every member
of the group, the last of these L—— interviews
closed.[10]
The experience at L——, while stimulating,
was also fatiguing, and for several days
thereafter I was tired and dull, receiving with
difficulty the few communications that were
attempted.
Tuesday evening, April 23d, two of Anne
Lowe’s friends wished to talk to her, but were
told that she was busy and could not come.
Mary K. answered some of their questions,
concluding: “Anne sends love to you both,
and says please come again soon. She is sorry
she can’t come now.”
After giving me the twelfth Lesson, Mary K.
had said: “That is the last formal lesson. The
rest will be given in other ways.”
“You mean through interviews and personal
messages?”
“Not entirely. You will be given signed
letters, by great forces.”
Afterward, she mentioned these prospective
communications sometimes as “letters,” sometimes
as “talks,” but Mary Kendal told us,
May 13th, that this intention had been temporarily
abandoned, as sufficient material for
the book had already been given. Evidently
this decision had been reached only recently,
however, for an attempt to give me the first
letter was frustrated on the 25th of April, and
a second period of confusion and partial control
by invading forces ensued.
During the morning, Mary K. prepared me
for this letter, in a communication written
quickly and easily, as follows:
“Men will ask the theory of the letters that
are coming to them through you. This must
be explained.
“As the Lessons have been given to me to
deliver to the world through you, so the letters
that are to come will be given to me by the
forces from whom they come. The reason
that they come through me is that I reach
you more freely, when you are alone, than any
other force known to you and therefore commanding
your confidence....
“The Lessons came from great forces combined.
They represent unity of all purposes,
and were framed by the co-operation and agreement
of the greatest forces of each constructive
purpose, to reach the consciousness of men
in general terms of your plane.
“The reason that these forces do not come
to you personally is that not all of them can
reach you as freely as I do. Your simile of
wireless telegraphy is a good one. It does not
fully explain the connection between you and
me, but is as good an explanation as the progress
of physical science enables you on that
plane to follow. The full explanation will inevitably
be possible, as physical scientists are
already beginning to work toward it.
“You and I may be regarded as the receiving
and sending instruments through which forces
here transmit their messages. You receive
from many other instruments, I send through
others. But for impersonal messages you and
I are most completely in accord, and thus
it is that these greater forces use us as a means
of communication. The first letter is ready
now.”
It chanced, unfortunately, that I was called
away, and when I was prepared to take the
letter, later in the day, almost two hours were
consumed in an attempt to write the name
of its author, who was described as “a leading
educator.” Eventually I was assured that
“Matthew Alden” was correct, but, while the
name was repeatedly written, I had a strong
impression that it was not what Mary K. had
intended to write. Reminding myself of previous
difficulties in obtaining names, I tried to
believe that the delay and fatigue incident to
this effort had contributed to my doubt of its
authenticity. But the doubt remained.
The long letter which followed was also received
with great difficulty and many delays,
and proved, when completed, to be a verbose
jumble of platitudes concerning educational
methods, with here and there a striking phrase.
It was signed, “Matthew Al....” By this
time, I was excessively tired and could obtain
but one statement from Mary K. “You have
not the name right.”
Later in the evening, I took up a pencil,
and it wrote: “Mar ... Matthew Ald....”
The name was not finished.
“Isn’t Mary K. here?”
“No. No, she will return.”
“She said she would be with me through
this work.”
“She will again. Mary K....” Illegible
lines followed.
“Is this Mary K. now?”
“No. Mary K. has gone. This is Mar....”
Again the reply trailed off indeterminately.
“Mary Kendal?”
“No. Mary K. has gone. Matthew.”
Eventually, failing to elicit any response
from Mary K., I asked whether Matthew had
anything to say to me, and he replied with
vague phrases, so reminiscent of the “letter”
that I impatiently gave up the attempt for
the day.
The next day, Friday, Matthew’s signature
was the only one obtainable, but I have no
record of any messages. I think I refused to
take them from him. Saturday morning, I
tried again.
“Matthew ald....”
“I want Mary K. Why isn’t she here?”
“Mary K. will be ret ... eternally with you.”
“Then isn’t she here now?”
“No, she was called away. She will come
back soon.”
“Was that letter from the ‘educator’ yours?”
“No, I am not a force for light. I am for
truth and healing.”
“Did you deliver it to me?”
“No.”
“Then why was your name given before it?”
“Mary K. to ... taken ... told ... took ...
tried to tell you I was here and would guard
you. She will return soon.”
“Do you know about the letter? Did she
give it to me?”
“Not all of it. She will explain. I am just
Mary K.’s tatl ... to ... tr ... tried ...
trained substitute.”
Asked how he could be her substitute, when
admittedly not of her purpose, he said: “Healing
is her purpose and mine, and truth the
best guard.”
At this time, the Farrow mystery was still
unsolved. Not until after this second prolonged
experience was I given any explanation
of these attacks by opposing forces, or of
the conditions governing such struggles, and
while I was less disquieted than upon the
first occasion, I was still puzzled and uneasy,
strongly suspecting interference of some kind.
That afternoon, Mrs. Gaylord and one of
her daughters, passing through the city, came
in for a brief talk with Frederick, and while
there was at first some interference, he was
soon writing with his customary clarity and
vigor.
When his sister asked about a personality
aggressively demanding utterance through her
pencil, he said: “Not much! Don’t give in
to him.... Don’t you let anybody you don’t
know tell you anything. It may be true and
it may not, and it’s not a game to play any
more blindfolded than you have to be. You
have to take a good deal on faith, at best.
Identify anybody who comes, as far as possible.”
“Can you tell me from whom that ‘letter’
came?” I asked.
“That letter got deteriorated in transmission.
It short-circuited, so to speak, and
was somewhat damaged. The next, we hope,
will be better.”
After my friends’ departure, I caught Mary
K. briefly, when she told me the source of the
letter she had tried to deliver, adding that it
had been too much interrupted. “Other forces
tried to intervene and dominated you temporarily,”
she said, after which the pencil
wrote only “Ma ... Ma ... Ma....” sometimes
surrounding the letters with two reversed
circles. I suggested Maynard, but the
answer was, “No ... Ma ... Ma ... Matt....”
“I am not a disintegrating force,” was the
reply to my accusation. “I am Mary K....”
“Mary K. back?”
“... no ... her substitute. Mary K. will
return soon.”
“Are you sure of that?”
“Yes. Mary K. is here.” This was followed
by Mary K.’s characteristic and vigorous
signature. “You should know me.”
“It seems easy for the others to masquerade,”
I mentioned.
“Not to your touch,” she returned, indicating
a means of identification that I had hesitated
to trust.
“Why do you leave me?” I demanded.
“You know I have followed light, healing,
and justice all my life,” was her retort. “Why
doubt me now? I leave you that ... Ma ...
Ma ... Ma ...”
By a curious coincidence, the names of several
persons connected with these communications
begin with those two letters—Mary
K., Mary Kendal, Mansfield, Maynard, Margaret—and
I suggested each of them in turn,
before it occurred to me that “M. A.” signified
Matthew Alden, the usurper.
That evening was spent with Anne Lowe
and her friends—Anne in one of her whimsical
moods, jesting most of the time, with occasional
more serious moments.
Speaking of a dog for whose death they had
grieved, she said: “He came, and grew into
a better force, and some day he’ll make an
adorable baby. Part of him, anyway. He was
almost human. Every force goes on to a higher
one—unless it slides back. In the end it’s got
to go on, so why fret and fume about a step
either way? Whichever way it is, it’s one step
nearer the end, and the end is inevitable and fine.
If people must have coasting, let them coast.
They’ll begin climbing that much sooner.”
“Matt ...” was written once, but with one
voice we refused to talk to him. Mary K.
followed, with a reference to a promise she had
made to Ruth, several weeks before. Then Anne
again, with an apparently clear connection.
Sunday, I was unable to get anything from
Mary K. I was told she was away, doing my
work. Monday morning, M. A. told me that
Mary K. would be “through with the task
soon,” and wrote various phrases intended to
be misleading. In my note-book, at this point,
I find the following entry: “I am beginning
to get M. A.’s messages a little more freely,
but they are still slow and difficult.”
Upon the departure of a visitor, late in the
afternoon, I was conscious of a strong summons,
and of a strange sense of turmoil and
commotion. When I took up the pencil, the
applied force was very strong at moments,
then ceased utterly—sometimes sharply, in the
middle of a word, or with a letter only half
formed. Occasionally, the pencil was dragged
down until it almost lay flat on the paper, and
cancelations were frequent.
“Matthew Alden is destructive ... Ma ...
M. A.... Matthew is destr.... des ... de ...
disturbed about Mary K. She means to be
the force de ... to have ... han ... handle
you, but she destr ... has not done ... been
here ... held to her purpose, and has departed
to the other side of the world. She must be
held firmly to her purpose.”
Knowing Mary K.’s steadfastness in all
things, I said that this was absurd.
“She will be pursued ... bett ... forced to
strong pleading to be allowed to do the rest
of the letters. She should be having a following
of our forces. She has been detained for
a long time. Matthew Alden ... is having
a battle.... Matthew has been defeated and
... M. A.... Matthew is de ... det ...”
Bewildered and irritated, I demanded:
“What does this mean?”
“Means that the powers ... forces of de ... construction
are defeated. We have been
beaten.”
“I don’t believe that for a minute,” I said.
“Or do you mean the military forces? Is
Germany winning a battle to-day?”
“No, that is the least of it.”
“Are you trying to tell me that Germany
will win?”
“Yes, we are defeated. Her forces have
reassembled, and have helped her slaughter
ours.” Again I said I did not believe it.
“M. A.... Matthew is doing his best.”
“You said he was defeated.”
“He lost a fight.”
“If you are Mary K.’s substitute, why doesn’t
she come to the rescue?” I asked.
“She didn’t. She believes Matthew held
out.... Message from Mary K. Margaret,
I do.... I do fight for you.” I asked if Mary
K. were writing. “No. Go to high forces
for help. Only be forceful for us first. Mary
K. will do her best for forces of light and
progress. Matthew is better and danger is
passing. M. A.” I demanded Mary K. “Not
this time. All the forces have gathered....
She should ... said be forceful.”
Saying that the whole thing seemed absurd,
I asked whether it had to do with Germany
and the war, or with the book and me—provided
it had to do with anything, which I began
to question.
“It is the flander ... it is the battle ...
book, not the godse ... god sent war.”
Amazed, I questioned: “Is God-sent war
right?”
After some delay—when one of the numerous
blanks occurred, all force being withdrawn from
the pencil—the impression of tumult instantly
ceased, leaving a sense of sudden quiet and
peace. Then—“Mary K. Mary K. Mary K.”
“That feels like Mary K.,” I said.
“It means Mary K., too.”
“What did all that mean?”
“Meant that the forces of disintegration
have had control of you for days, at moments.
Matthew was a force for fear.”
When I asked whether she had been away
she wrote quickly: “No, not for one instant.
He held me back, and called to your fear in
accents of truth.... We have the forces all
about us, and sometimes we are overpowered
and compelled to let them through temporarily,
but they can always be fought away in time.”
Brisk circles of affirmation followed my suggestion
that possibly this explained the Farrow
episode, and she made the statement previously
quoted: “We had a terrific struggle
for you then. We told you the truth, but the
other forces controlled the pencil.”
Weeks afterward, I asked her to explain
more fully this dual control, and her reply
seems to me singularly illuminating.
“The connection with the pencil has no
influence on your consciousness. We may control
the consciousness, through purpose and
its unity, even though other forces control the
material instrument.”
This seems not only to show why these
messages are written sometimes with and
sometimes without the messenger’s previous
knowledge of their content, but also to offer
a possible explanation of phenomena of a much
wider range.
To my great surprise, Mary Kendal announced
herself a day or two after this, having
preceded Mansfield, she said, because I was
“fairly beleaguered by the enemy” in an attempt
to prevent the publication of the
message.
In spite of this reinforcement, however, M.
A. persisted in attempts to engage my attention.
On one occasion, he invited me to “try
a little change” and talk to him. On another,
he asked me to let him write, as he had “a
long story to tell” about my husband, who
was out of town. Again, he assured me that
I had disappointed “them,” that “they” felt
that I had failed as a messenger, and that
Mary K. had departed permanently. Still
again, when confusion seemed to have overtaken
the book project, he declared, quite
frankly: “We have stopped you now. M. A.”
No longer troubled by these intrusions, however,
I never permitted him to use the pencil
after his identity had been discovered. Occasionally
I was deceived for a moment, and
not infrequently it was his failure to complete
a sentence or a word that betrayed him.
“He defeats himself by his fear, like all
cowards,” Mary K. said, one day, and when
I mentioned that his messages lacked continuity,
she returned: “No coward is consecutive.
How could he be?”
These were by no means the last of the encounters
with Matthew. Mr. Kendal arrived
on the 7th of May, and a night or two later,
when several of those interested in these communications
were together, M. A. made his
appearance again. For some time his initials
followed every attempt to establish communication
with our invisible friends, but eventually
we obtained Mary Kendal’s clear signature,
and a message, slowly written, with
frequent pauses, during which the personality
striving to oppose her was gradually overcome.
M. A.’s erratic touch was occasionally evident,
lessening in strength as Mary’s steady, gentle
control increased.
“Come on,” she said, finally. “We are
ready for a little fun now, and we will leave the
more serious matters until we have more truly
a clear field.”
Accordingly, we abandoned our intended
inquiry, for the moment, resorting to persiflage,
in which she took an active part, writing
with increased fluency.
“Laughter is a constructive force, children,”
she told us, when things were going smoothly
again. “Remember that when you fight fiends....
If we keep our touch close, and laugh like
that, with real mirth, they can’t get in.”
Later that evening, Anne Lowe came for
a moment, just to tell us, she said, that we
had made a step in learning what laughter
that is from the heart will do. “It is protective,
constructive, curative, and the devil for
devils. They can’t get over, or around, or
through it. That’s your best weapon and your
best protection, aside from fundamental purposes.
Use it, and more power to your—what
is it you laugh with? Diaphragm, or what?”
The next night, when conditions were normal
from the first, we asked Mary Kendal about
this incident, and she said: “It was just a
massed attack, which will occur from time to
time. They will fight as long as they exist,
but the virulence and violence of their present
efforts is due to our united attack on them.”
An interesting and illuminating variation of
these occasional sorties occurred during an
interview between a man of whose personal
relations and interests I have only the most
casual knowledge, and a personality on the
next plane whom I knew not at all.
The first messages to him, as to most of the
others, concerned purpose and its unity. Apparently
not convinced of the authenticity
of their source, he repeatedly asked for an
intimate, characteristic, personal message.
Not receiving it, he asked a question relating
to an entirely imaginary situation—“just to
see,” as he afterward explained.
The question was answered in detail, immediately
followed by the statement, “Phil
fears too much.”
Suspecting interference, from the peculiar
movement of the pencil, I asked him who Phil
was, and when he replied that he knew no
such person, I demanded to know who was
writing.
“M. A.” This signature was not complete,
but the reply to a question in this connection,
purporting to come from Mary K., was followed
by a vigorous repetition of M. A.’s
initials, inclosed in two reversed circles—his
characteristic signature when in full control
of the pencil.
My visitor then admitted that he had asked
a fictitious question, but attempts to learn who
had answered it resulted in contradictory assertions
from various sources, and knowing the
difficulty of re-establishing a connection once
effectually broken, I refused to continue the
interview.
“The integrity of the seeker,” Mary K. said,
the next day, “is the messenger’s only protection
from disintegrating force during an interview.
These forces should be persistently
repelled, not invited. Ignorance of their presence
and power frequently opens a way for
them, as in this instance. Absolute sincerity
and candor are essential to the maintenance
of a connection with constructive forces, in
these interviews.”
“Forces of disintegration do not wait to be
invited,” she asserted, on another occasion.
“They constantly attack, and seize the first
opportunity to take possession. We, also,
watch and call, and enter where we can. But
the idea of original sin is so strongly implanted
in the minds of most men, that an assumption
that disintegrating force can only enter where
it is invited is inevitable. It must be clearly
understood that attack by forces of disintegration
does not imply weakness, or fear, or
sinful desire. It implies only a desire on the
part of the attacking force to destroy. That
there are individuals given to disintegration is
another matter. Those most desirous of construction
and progress are more often attacked
by persistent, massed forces of destructive
purpose. To be conscious of this is to be protected,
to some degree. For that reason, we
urge the publication of these truths, that the
struggle may no longer be waged in ignorance
and doubt and confusion.”
“Does ‘massed forces of destructive purpose’
imply some combination, or co-operation,
or co-ordination, among disintegrating forces?”
Mary K. was asked, at another time.
“Yes, they combine every appealing force,
as we do. One man may answer to doubt,
fear, cupidity, and envy. Another to malice,
doubt, and lust. Any forces that can reach him
mass themselves in attack and call on their purposes
in him to respond.”
“Then there must be a considerable degree
of intelligence among them. You said they
would become constructive when intelligent.”
“When intelligent enough. I never meant
to imply that the purposes and forces of destruction
are unintelligent. They are not fully
intelligent. They are not balanced, not fully
animated. All forces of construction comprehend
destruction. No forces of destruction
comprehend construction. They are intelligent
and wily in destruction, but fail to apprehend
its futility.”
“Are they what we on this plane call uneducated,
unlearned, ignorant in that sense?”
“They are sometimes found on your plane
among the highly educated, learned, and powerful.
Here we regard them as undeveloped
forces, to be fought unceasingly until they
consent to become constructive.”
“You don’t call that coercing your brother,
do you?” I asked.
“No, we do not compel them to construct,
if they would destroy by preference. We oppose
them until they perceive that they must
fail, and seek light. Then we accept them,
instruct them, and are stronger.... The forces
opposing us have no faith, hence no knowledge
of a future. They dread destruction, fear the
end of existence, deny a future, and constantly
seek to destroy the inevitable.”
In this connection, Mr. Kendal once asked
Mary: “What do the evil forces think they’re
trying to do? Have they lost the great primary
idea? Was there a great primary idea?
Or are they just bandar-logging it around in
a chaotic forest of spiritual upas-trees, screaming
at anything they happen to see?”
“There was no great primary idea of destruction,”
she returned. “A lot of idle force
gathered together, and finding itself behind the
procession in strength, radiance, and beauty,
began envying and coveting and backbiting,
and from that to destruction is a logical and
inevitable progression. Why is anybody among
you envious, or malicious, or cowardly, or destructive?
There is no great idea behind it.
They see they are behind somebody else in
something, and instead of developing what
constructive power they have of their own,
they, hate the person who has more and try
to destroy him, or his reputation, or his property.
There you have concrete examples of
all the idea there is in destructive purpose.
It’s spiritual unintelligence.”
“Why did they quit Germany?” he asked,
then. “Isn’t the apotheosis of such personal
and deterrent and soul-driving and dominating
purposes just their caliber?”
“They see the forces of progress gathering
among you, and know that they cannot win
through Germany. She still follows their
methods, but without their help, while every
vibration of progressive and co-operative purpose
among you enables us to help you more.
So they have left her to the fruits of their
union, the consequence inevitable, and hatch
fresh mischief themselves.”
On the evening of his arrival, May 7th, Mr.
Kendal asked his wife whether she could stay
with us during his visit to New York, and
she replied that she would outstay him, unless
the forces attacking me were defeated before
his departure.
“It really helps, then, for us to get together
here,” he inferred.
“Yes, indeed, it helps. All combination of
force adds by the sum of its participation to
the original amount of force combined.”
Taken in conjunction with other, similar
assertions in this connection—“Its force is freed
and multiplied by the sum of your participation”;
“For every vibration of pure constructive
purpose among the Allied forces, we have
added two”; “Force united is more powerful
by half than similar forces separately striving”;
etc.—it seems probable that these expressions
were intended as figures of speech, emphasizing
the increased potency of united purpose on our
plane and the ability of the free forces to reinforce
it in proportion to its actual vitality,
rather than as mathematical statements of the
exact degree to which this reinforcement and
co-operation may be carried.
Mentioning that sometimes they seemed to
make a distinction between purpose and force,
and again to use the terms interchangeably,
Mr. Kendal said he would like to know the
character of each. “Is purpose like the direction
of an electric current, and force like
amperage and voltage?” he asked. “Or is
purpose the road, and force the velocity in following
it? Is purpose qualitative, and force
quantitative? Is the distinction between them
along some of these lines?”
“It is along all those lines,” was the reply.
“Purpose is the force that draws. Force is the
purpose that pushes.”
Like various others to whom these messages
first came through me, Mr. Kendal had been
trying, with some success, to obtain direct
communication. Mary facetiously described
his pencil as “a good burro,” and mine as “a
real hawse.” I had thought this dialecticism
differently spelled, but he reminded me that
“hoss” belonged to New England, and
“hawse” to Mary’s native state, Kentucky.
While the pencil-point rested idly on the
paper, we talked about the sensations accompanying
its movement, and about the probable
direction of the force propelling it. To him,
the impulse seemed to come first and chiefly
through the consciousness; to me, it seemed
a physical force externally applied to the
pencil, notwithstanding occasional consciousness
of what the message would be; but we
were agreed that it was difficult, at first, to
be sure that the impulse was not in some unrecognized
way our own.
“It has been amusing to us to see you two
struggle against our psychical intrusions,”
Mary remarked, at this point. “We do push
the pencil. We also reach the mind. Sometimes
the one, sometimes the other, is what
does the trick. It is easier for us to impress
the mind, but harder for you to recognize that
suggestion as ours. You think it’s your own,
and fight. Margaret is even more resistant
than Manzie—perhaps because she has more
responsibility to other people.”
“Are present conditions—the gathering of
the clans for the coming struggle—going to
enable many people to do this, who have never
done it before and otherwise would have been
unable to do it?” he asked.
“Yes; but the danger of that is that the
other forces will find their own channels, and
steal and defile some of ours. So we can’t
advise people to experiment, unless they can
absolutely identify the force here, and only a
few, comparatively, can do that.”
He said that he had hesitated to ask questions
of his own pencil, being unwilling to go
too far in this until he had checked it up
through me.
“He’s scairt,” she teased, before he had fairly
started to speak. “You don’t trust yourself
or me.”
Laughing, he retorted: “That’s another!”
“You are right to be careful,” she went on,
serious again. “It’s a dangerous adventure,
unless you keep your balance, follow your own
purpose, keep close tab on the force handling
the pencil, and lean on it only spiritually. The
minute advice in material things is sought,
that minute there is danger.”
“There’s no danger that anybody can impersonate
you and fool me,” he declared.
“Never! The danger is that somebody
might lie to you about me; or if you cease to
stand on your own feet and make your own
choice in matters of your plane, only then
somebody might impersonate me for a moment.
Sometimes I can tell you those things, but the
habit of depending on them is bad for you.”
A night or two later, beginning with a reply
to a question concerning another subject, she
returned to the discussion of the force used
in conveying these communications—“a force
compared to which electricity is like spring
water,” she said—declaring, like Frederick,
that its explanation is still impossible in terms
of our plane.
“There is a vital and potent force, not yet
isolated—and hardly discovered—by your most
advanced scientists,” she told us. “It has
characteristics and attractions not explainable
until its discovery and analysis give rise to a
new set of words. There is no adequate
comparison that may be used to indicate its
force, or the conditions and degrees of its
variations. It has some resemblance to electricity,
yet the comparison in certain cases
would be misleading.”
“I am talking about the force we use in
moving this pencil, and to some extent in
affecting your thought,” she continued, when
Mr. Kendal had mentioned certain recent
scientific experiments of which he had read.
“The scientists have long associated the power
of thought with the brain, and have seriously
argued that, as we could not be seen, measured,
weighed, or condensed, we did not exist. We
do. And we have a force at our command
that cannot be explained, as yet. It can only
occasionally be demonstrated as clearly as
this. Electricity is the most likely to impress
the man in the street as a comparison, but to
argue from that as a premise would lead to
misconception. At present, it must be accepted
as a recognized but not understood
force, only dimly perceived, as for years
electricity was.”
“Does it help, if we emphasize what we know
of static electricity, as well as thinking of the
comparison in terms of electric current? A
static force in your plane, perhaps?”
“Yes, that helps; but the static force is in
your plane, quite as much as here. We have
more knowledge of the current, to continue
the simile, but encounter static conditions both
here and there, as well as counter currents
here.”
This would seem to offer reasons—in addition
to David Bruce’s explanation of the difficulties
of translation when the messenger’s
reaction to certain word-symbols fails—for occasional
delays in the transmission of these
communications.
“Margaret hasn’t tried us yet with an
antagonistic force on your plane,” she said,
on another occasion. “We don’t do it this
way when the forces there are not harmonious.”
“Is your forward sight much greater than
ours?” her husband asked. “Or is it, in relation
to other planes, about what ours is in regard
to yours?”
“We can see the end as you have not even
dreamed it yet, but our detailed knowledge is
limited to two or three planes beyond ours.
Even here, development is uneven, and some
of us see farther than others. We are far from
omniscient or omnipotent. We have advanced
beyond you, our individual purposes are clear
where yours are confused, we know where we
are bound and why, we see much farther ahead
than you can, and we work in three planes—yours
as teachers, ours as laborers, and the
next as students.”
Referring to the statements about Russia,
of which we had told him, he asked whether
there were the same relative differences of
opinion and judgment among them as among
us, as to psychological policies to be pursued
for the Great Purpose, and as to the applications
of those policies on this plane.
“There are some differences of perception.
Light, for example, sees shadow and desires
to dispel it. Truth sees error and wishes to
correct it. But, broadly speaking, the opinions
are the same. The impediments in the
path of progress are many. Each purpose
deals with its own; Light with darkness,
Truth with error, and so on. Each may work
in the same field, even in the same individual,
but here we work for the same ultimate purpose.
We do not disagree. Each follows his
own work, and recognizes the other’s field.”
“We have a united policy,” she said, at another
time, “but each our individual application
of it in personal relations and messages
like these. It is all intended to enlighten and
inspire you, but only in certain fundamental
and specific matters are we instructed what to
say.”
“Can you determine time there, by other
than the memory of it here and by close inspection?”
was another question.
“We have no time here, in your sense. We
watch you, and remember, but we lose track
of you, sometimes.”
Mr. Kendal then said—explaining his phrase,
“close inspection”—that he thought they saw
time dimly, as we see through water or through
fog.
“Is memory with you as acute as answers to
some of these questions seem to indicate?” one
of us inquired.
“Not of material things, generally. We
don’t pay much attention to them, unless they
interfere with purpose. Just now they are
interfering a good deal—or were, before the
war, which is itself a material manifestation of
purpose.” We said that we should have
thought this interference in full force still, and
she continued: “The real interference, from
our point of view, came before the war, when
the world outside of Germany was too much
occupied in pursuit of material things to see
what was happening. They failed even to
see Germany’s intention. Much less did they
discover their own danger, of which Germany’s
purpose, materially, was the least. The war
woke them up by degrees, fortunately, or there
would be no use telling them this.”
A question concerning the possibility of
communicating with a person recently departed
from this plane, was met with the statement
that he had “free communion” still to learn.
This expression had been used several times
by others, and now I asked: “Mary, what is
free communion?”
“You don’t think we vocalize our talk, do
you?”
Mansfield suggested that when a man found
himself suddenly without his material veil, he
must be at a loss how to proceed, and asked
whether that was what she meant.
“Not entirely. The veil isn’t missed particularly,
but there is a ... a....”
“Difference of medium?” he asked. “Like
a water-color artist who can’t paint in oil?”
“That’s it.”
“Referring to your assertion in March that
truth is absolute,” he said, “is not truth itself
relative on this plane? Truth as a statement of
eternal law is absolute, but when applied to concrete
facts and ideas, it changes from time to
time? That is, a concrete statement which
expressed the relations of certain mundane
conditions to the eternal verities in B.C. 1000,
would not necessarily be a correct statement
of the relations of corresponding conditions to
those verities in the year 1900 A.D.”
“That is the idea on which this whole revelation
is based,” she returned. “These things
have always been true. They would not have
sounded true in the year one, any more than
a lot of the ‘truths’ of that day are true now.”
A night or two after this, he said he would
like more light on the practical application of
these principles, especially those in relation to
freedom. “How, for instance, would you go
about helping a school?” he asked. “Take, as
concrete examples, a University like ——, its
Faculty held in subjection by hidebound
trustees, and the proposed People’s University,
to be governed from day to day by plebiscite
or referendum, with no defined policy for procedure
beyond a general idea of freedom.
‘You may lead a horse to water, but you can’t
make him drink.’ Should the construction of
the trough be left to chance, or should it be
planned carefully? In other words, should
mundane provision and prevision be employed
in building it?”
“It has been said already that men must
first learn to think, and to govern themselves,
before they can be free.” It was Mary K.
who answered. “If experience were not taken
into consideration, progress would be impossible.
Mundane prevision and provision is
essential to all constructive activity on your
plane. Opinions will differ as to ways and
means of applying principles of progress.
The first way to help a school is to establish
unity among the teachers. Not only
unity of purpose, but a certain large unity of
method, that one may not tear down what
his brother builds. Ideals of freedom have
been confused by men resenting the first law
of freedom—discipline. Lack of discipline,
carried to its logical conclusion, would return
the world to chaos. The school that is free
in its teaching must be carried on by disciplined
teachers, united in a purpose of progress clearly
recognized and agreed upon, to teach discipline
that the minds of men may dare to be free.”
“The idea underlying that, I take it, is that
as the athlete whose body is thoroughly trained
and co-ordinated dares to jump an abyss,
without fear of falling, so the man whose
mind and spirit are disciplined can jump an
intellectual abyss, without losing balance or
sanity.”
“Yes. And as a man trained to carry great
weights on his shoulders must be trained to it
from youth, so the man who would carry government
and freedom of thought must train
his mind to carry its weight—not alone to
hold it briefly, but to carry it on.”
“Is it true, then,” he asked, “that safe freedom
and constructive freedom are only possible
after prior discipline and self-control?”
“How can undisciplined freedom be safe or
constructive? It makes the wilderness. It
makes the jungle. It makes the uncharted
and devouring sea.”
One day, about the middle of May, discussing
these manifestations over a luncheon table,
a man who described himself as “a sympathetic
agnostic” mentioned that while all those on
the next plane reported that they were busy,
none to his knowledge had told just what they
were doing.
At that time, we had received several statements
concerning their activities. Frederick
had spoken of his efforts in connection with “a
pro-German newspaper editor.” Maynard
Holt’s mother had told us that she worked
“with undeveloped purposes, here before their
time.” It had been said of a famous editor:
“He is for Justice.... He is one of the forces
determining the grouping of the newly arrived.”
Anne Lowe had said: “I handle children.
Some of them thought they were grown
up when they left you.” And the work of the
healers, in receiving and soothing “war-stricken
forces,” had been repeatedly mentioned.
However, with the comment of the “sympathetic
agnostic” in mind, we asked Mary Kendal,
apropos of some allusion to the healers
on her plane, whether she could tell us of their
work in detail.
“You have already seen that our ability to
be specific, even about things here, is dependent
on your ability to understand conditions
of our plane,” she reminded us. “As fast as
we can, we give it to you. But as well explain
the operation of wireless telegraphy to an illiterate
‘cracker,’ as to try to explain healing,
as we understand and practise it, to the person
unprepared by thought and study of these
truths.”
The next day, in another city, Frederick,
writing through a member of his family, said
that he had been doing some work in developing
some spirits who had “let their lowest tendencies
be their guiding force.”
“They were men who were very unhappy,
because they had left the world before they
were ready, and did not know what this life
meant,” he said.
“Had they recently gone over?” he was
asked.
“Yes, not very long on this side. They were
so bewildered that they thought they were in
some kind of dream that they could not wake
from. They had been sick, but not long enough
to let them get any idea of death, or light after
death, so they were sorry to come over.”
“Do they call you teacher?”
“No, just a friend.”
Replying to a question about a specific activity
on this plane, he said: “I can tell you
that a lot of those things that seem bewildering
are not important enough to be doing what we
call work here.”
“What do you call work?”
“Conscious development of spiritual forces.”
A month later, a question about a woman
known here as a sculptor brought the following
reply from David Bruce.
“She is working with a development of the
purpose of production, which is the foundation
that underlay her work there. She is producing
force by developing the undeveloped
producers.”
Probably the most specific information yet
received by any of our small group concerning
the practical application of these principles
to the affairs of our plane, came through Maynard
Holt.
“My work lies principally with business men
on your plane,” he said, one day, to a family
connection. “We are much concerned about
the lack of co-operation among persons of constructive
tendencies, and my own job is to
apply this force we cannot fully explain to
you, in any way that will influence men or
women toward co-operation. Sometimes we
use it to suggest a new idea. Sometimes we
use it to so direct apparently consequential
circumstances and events that the person we
wish to influence gets an object lesson.”
In support of this is a statement of his made
in April. While writing a long message, most
of which was intimately personal, he indicated
his interest in business conditions, and urged
a greater and more far-seeing co-operation
among business men. In the midst of a sentence
the pencil stopped, creating a long delay.
Failing, after repeated efforts, to transmit the
word he had attempted, he drew a series of
singularly uniform arches across the whole
width of the paper.
After puzzling over it a moment, I drew a
line above the arches, and said, perceiving no
significance in the symbol: “That looks like
a viaduct.”
“That’s what I mean,” he resumed, vigorously,
and proceeded with an elaboration of his
theme, comparing co-operation to a viaduct.
“In the end, the forces for progress will
cross to all lands by that viaduct,” he continued,
“and those who balk and refuse it
will be diverted and delayed by following old
paths through the tortuous chasm of competitive
destruction. Not that we discourage
competition. The individual organization, like
the individual man, must follow its purpose
and develop its force, but ... competition at
its best is entirely friendly and constructive.
Boys have it taught them in the simplest form
in college sports. There it is personal, but
co-operative in the development of college
spirit. Each man does his best for himself
and his own record, but loyally and cheerfully
supports against opposing forces the more successful
man who is of his own group. With
increasing responsibilities, temptations and difficulties
increase, but experience should bring
ability to meet them. The code of school and
college forces may be developed and applied
to business and productive forces. This is the
first application of college training to competitive
business.”
Afterward, when Mr. Kendal had expressed
his cordial sympathy with the theory of co-operation,
widely applied, Maynard said:
“That’s where the college team has won and
the union has failed. The union was good in
conception, but has made for the suppression
of individual development, where the college
team encourages it.”
Later still, following a conversation concerning
national economics and international
commerce after the war, he said:
“Co-operation is moral. Commercial supremacy
is material. Material success is constructive
only if permanent, and permanent
only if constructive. Until co-operation for
permanent progress becomes a principle of
international as well as national purpose, there
will be little actual progress toward permanent
peace, or lasting prosperity.
“As the college boy works first for his own
power, but most for his team, and first, last
and all the time for clean athletics, so the business
man should work first for his unit, definitely
for his country’s welfare, but first, last
and always for clean co-operation with all who
make for the world’s progress.
“The exponents of national supremacy at
the expense of world progress are exactly in
the position of the exponents of personal prosperity
at the expense of national welfare. The
situations are analogous to a degree as yet
comprehended by few men.
“It took many years to convince the manufacturer
that increased production would follow
shorter hours and improved working conditions.
It took many years to convince
merchants that decreased cost and increased
profit followed combination of forces. It took
some time to convince financiers and manufacturers
that success, not failure, would follow
the co-operation of competing concerns in the
foreign field. Yet it is now recognized that all
these things are true and practicable. No less—even
more—is it practicable to unite world
forces of progress in commerce as they are
united now in war, the fight at all times being
for construction and development, against
destruction and regression.
“This cannot be done in a day or a year,
but this is the goal toward which enlightened
forces should move. It may sound Utopian
now. So did model factories and tenements,
a few years ago. Their advocates were scoffed
at and discredited. Now, the manufacturer
who fails to provide healthful working conditions
for his operatives is called short-sighted
and pig-headed, and cheats himself twice,
while cheating his employees once.
“Co-operation is the basic principle of all
progress, and the point at which it stops is
the measure of strength of man or nation.
The nation that refuses to co-operate for progress
is a nation confessing itself deterrent.”
Again, in June, Maynard returned to this
subject, saying that men must become “strong
enough to let the other fellow live and prosper,
without fearing him.” After mentioning “fear
of what may come, or lust for what may be
seized,” as motives making for destruction, he
added: “Neither is constructive or progressive,
and neither can win in the end.”
“We have purpose to progress beyond the
vision of man,” he went on, “but even material
progress, to be constructive and permanent,
must be governed by a vision beyond
the day. We are trying to extend that
vision.
“Co-operation in individual enterprise has
succeeded. Co-operation in national enterprise
would succeed no less. More and more,
men are recognizing the value of united effort
in commercial enterprise, however long it took
the truth to dawn. Must other centuries pass,
other wars be fought, other dynasties rise and
fall, before the larger truth ushers in a new
day? Will co-operation in business, co-operation
in war, teach them to study and practise
co-operation in world welfare and progress?
Will they learn that it is not only in war that
a weakened Belgium means an endangered
England, that a hungry France means short
rations in America, that a link weakened means
the chain weak?
“How many times must this premise be
demonstrated before the argument is carried
to its logical conclusion, and national co-operation,
free and voluntary, provide for the
good of one by protecting and developing
all?
“This is not a Utopian fantasy. It is common
sense.”
Talking about the Lessons one day, Mr.
Kendal mentioned his impression that Zoroaster
had said something approaching the first
one in theory, and then asked, a whimsical gleam
in his eye: “Mary, has Professor James said
anything about Zoroaster in this connection?”
“Manzie, Mr. James has no philosophical
library here to refer to,” was the prompt retort.
She told us, however, that he would
soon come himself to talk to this former pupil
of his, adding a characteristic glint of humor
in the assurance that he would then give “a
demonstration of a philosopher simplified to a
force.”
A night or two afterward (May 13th), she
announced: “Manzie, here is Mr. James.”
There was a brief delay, and when the pencil
moved again, it was with a changed application of
force and a new movement, the first words being
personal. Referring to an early period in his
own investigation of psychic phenomena, he
said:
“Youth, in its nearness to inspiration, sometimes
sees more clearly than age, with its
academic dependence upon theory and precedent
and what men call the wisdom of experience.
When this wisdom is based on
perception, conscious or otherwise, of eternal
purpose, it transcends the vision of youth.
But when it is based on perception of physical
phenomena and the accumulated theories of
other men, youth has an inspiration and a
faith that leads it, all unknowing, to the brink
of great mysteries.” This was followed by an
allusion to those “befogged in precedent, physical
phenomena, and intellectual theory,” who
were “unable to follow where they should have
led.”
“There has seemed to be a good deal of
genuine feeling underlying the humorous persiflage
through the pencil about the scientific
state of mind,” Mr. Kendal suggested. “Hasn’t
the time come when we can reach the scientific
type of mind? And isn’t it worth while to do
so? And if so, what is the best psychological
line of attack?”
“The scientist is not by any means hopeless,
but like many men in your plane, he is overbalanced
and therefore unbalanced by physical
considerations. Physical phenomena are of
vital importance in your life, and their study
and analysis has led to a degree of material
progress which would have been incredible to
the third—and all but incredible to the second—generation
back. It is only because scientists
have persisted in the study of physical
phenomena that you are enabled to understand
in some part what is now being given you.
The misapprehension has been that physical
phenomena alone could be recognized. Those
who have believed that have denied the existence
of the greatest and most persistent of
all forces. Attempts to explain spiritual phenomena
by physical formulæ have been found
unsuccessful by every one save those who
took refuge in denial of the thing that moved
them to deny, the eternal and indestructible
purpose.
“When to their laboratories scientists bring
perception of spiritual phenomena exceeding
any material manifestation known to man in
strength and significance, then they may hope
to discover and develop a force beside which
all known forces are insignificant. Science is
the ladder by which life may quickly ascend,
but until science recognizes a spiritual force as
the one essential force, of which all other forces
are incidental phenomena, progress must be
limited.”
“Then, generally speaking,” Mr. Kendal
said, “perhaps the most effective appeal to
scientists would be the appeal to scientific
ambition.”
“Always the most effective means to win
any man to anything is to appeal to his purpose.
If it be personal, appeal to his vanity.
If it be progressive, appeal to his eagerness.
If it be intellectual, pique his curiosity. Scientists,
like others, are divided in purpose.”
“We have been much interested in the decisive
definiteness with which our friends on
that plane have been able to classify the purposes
of persons here,” Mr. Kendal mentioned.
“Is this as clear to you as physical characteristics
are to us, and as quickly determined?”
“Yes, and in much the same way. We see
motive and intention and their variations as
you see physical appearance, vitality and its
variations. We see disintegrating moral factors
more clearly than you see physical ills.
We judge of purpose by its vitality and persistence
under strain, precisely as you judge
of physical health by its vitality under strain
and by its persistence in spite of occasional
disease.”
“Then you see disintegrating force as the
scientist sees germs?” Cass inquired. “As
disease?”
“No, we see them as foes. I speak here
only of the way we judge purpose. There is
no diseased purpose. There may be struggle
between more or less intelligent forces, but in
using the simile of physical health, I did it in
a limited sense.”
“Is there an inherent reason for the different
types of philosophies?” Mr. Kendal now questioned.
“That is, the Nirvana-oblivion type
in the Orient, as contrasted with the hell-fire-and-brimstone
type in the Occident. If inherent,
is its cause geographical, intellectual,
biological, or what?”
“A little of all of them. Philosophies are
the outgrowth of conditions, physical, moral
and geographical—and therefore to some extent
biological—to a much greater degree than is
generally recognized. It has been said that
food makes the man. To a greater degree,
environment makes the philosopher.”
“May we publish this as coming from you?”
“Certainly. I am here for that purpose....
Light and Progress are my purposes, and
teaching still my work.”
After a few lines of purely personal significance,
this was signed: “William James.”
Of the messages that may be quoted, there
remain only a few detached statements, removed
from their personal context, but reproduced
because of their general interest or
significance.
“Don’t worry about C——” was one bit of
specific advice, given in March, before any of
the Lessons had been received. “She will have
her troubles, but she must dree her own weird.
You might save her some pain, but life’s purpose
may not be taught. It must be fought
for, with blood and sweat. Let C—— get
her wounds in her own way. You may then
soothe the pain. But don’t try to spare her
the fight. That has to do with the larger questions
of life and eternity.”
“‘Life’s purpose may not be taught,’ but
the laws underlying the search for it may be?”
“Of course. We are trying now to wake the
world to consciousness that these laws exist.
Most people, broadly speaking, have forgotten
them, in the general contempt for laws where
they are not enforced, and in the general
hatred of them where they are enforced in
oppression and fear.”
A few days later, another person, writing of
another and much younger girl, said: “She
may have a hard time over the conflicting
purposes. Everybody does. But with you
to give her a foundation, I do not fear for her....
Her struggles will only make her stronger.
Do not try to save her from pain. Remember
that it is her mother who says this. Let her
meet life fully and work her way upward.
She will always yield in the end to the sublime
purpose.”
On a later occasion, this same person said:
“We help all we can, but even when you want
us to, we are unwilling to hold back the larger
and vital development in order to hasten some
smaller conclusion. Even when the small conclusion
is important to you, it must be your
own choice that helps you; and if the choice
is wrong at the moment, it still helps in the
end.”
“She’s too sympathetic for her own good,”
was said of another young woman. “She’d do
the vicarious atonement act for all creation,
if she could. What she needs is to have this
purpose business driven into her. Every fellow
has to do his own fighting, and his own
atonement, and his own climbing, and take
what’s coming to him while he does it. She’s
always trying to soften the path and take the
swipes herself, and it can’t be done. She gets
the blow and the strain and the struggle, all
right, but it impedes her and gets the other
fellow nowhere. It helps nobody to save them
the consequences of their own choice. The
way to help is to call to their constructive purpose
and give them a chance. If they choose
not to take it, then let them take all the consequence
that’s coming. If that doesn’t teach
them, there’s nothing more to do, except to
turn them over to somebody who can arouse
their purpose, if they have any. Anyhow,
making a buffer of yourself just batters up
good material for no gain in force or purpose.”
Again, another person to another group.
“Let any fighting force do his own fighting.
Suggest, enlighten, encourage, but don’t try
to carry the burden of another’s life. You
can’t hurry their development, and you impede
your own and that of others of your own
purpose.... You are like the fellow in the
fable, who finished by carrying not only the
pack, but the donkey, too. It’s a very sweet
and unselfish disposition, but do you think it
improves the donkey for his station in life?
Not that I’m calling S—— a donkey, but like
all mankind, he carries a pack. You can’t
carry both, and he won’t learn to apply his
force evenly here if you do it for him there.
Lots of people develop unevenly and have to
even up somewhere. Why delay the process
by vicarious labor, especially when it only exhausts
you and doesn’t develop his muscles
any? Selah!”
“You can train O—— to carry physical
temptations, if you begin early,” a man said,
writing of his nephew. “Don’t let him yield
to impulse or desire when it is destructive.
Make him build his body first, as a boy.
Make him respect it and its promise. That’s a
bully thing for a boy to know at the beginning.
He reasons from that to other things. A boy
is a brute first, but a thinking brute. If he respects
the flesh, he respects all things in time.”
“What is my purpose?” a young man asked,
one day.
“Building. You are going to be ‘him that
hath.’ Build with your possessions. Begin the
foundation now. Build.... Build as a producer,
or as a healer, or in any way that
makes for progress, keeps you growing, develops
forces for construction, and gives the
other fellows a chance to do their best also....
Not for yourself alone, but for all who may
climb by your ladder of opportunity.”
Maynard Holt, writing to a friend here,
spoke of him as a good fighter, and when this
person said that he would not have been
able to fight at all, but for the little hand of
a lady on the next plane, Maynard returned:
“I know you fought hard, though in darkness,
before you found that hand. That’s one reason
we count on you now. A man who will fight
continuously in darkness is a ... a ...”
The pencil paused, and after futile efforts to
proceed, retraced its path, apparently to cross
out again and again the last letter. We were
talking and paid no attention to its movement,
but when it ceased again, we discovered that
Maynard had drawn a five-pointed star. Then
he proceeded: “... luminary of force himself,
when light breaks.”
There were many interesting characterizations,
both of persons on this plane and of
those on the next.
“E—— is a fine force, but A—— is a force
multiplied and refined to power,” was said of
one couple.
A striking example of the determination of
our “fantom friends” to convey their meaning
despite obstacles, was indicated when some
one had told me, during an interview, of a
boy’s objection to his mother’s activity in one
of the recent “drives” connected with war
work, on the ground that it “made her conspicuous.”
“M—— is an entirely tra ... trem ... tr ...
normal and tra ... tremulous youth, where
his mother and sister are concerned,” was his
father’s humorous comment.
Apparently, in this case, the connection was
imperfect, no intimation of his meaning reaching
me, and only by altering the form of his
sentence was he able to get it written.
“Miss T—— has much to learn and much
to suffer before a teaching based on unity of
force or purpose will reach her forcefully,” we
were told, on another occasion. “She must
learn the shallows of self before she can sound
the depths of individuality, in the larger and
eternal interpretation of the word.”
Following one of the numerous discussions
of Germany and her purposes, a question about
a man of German parentage brought this
reply: “B—— is American. The national
taint of docility is not in him.”
The meaning of purpose and its application
was stated many times in many ways. One
of the most characteristic of these expressions
came from a famous humorist.
“There are things brewing here and among
you there,” he said, “that are going to make
the wars of the tribes of Hohenzollern, Hapsburg
and Mephisto look like a village prayer
meeting. The carnage of Verdun and Mons
and the whole show since his little nibs was
assassinated is a picayune proposition compared
to the losses of time, purpose, force and
saving grace that we’re all going to feel, if
we can’t wake you people up to pull together
against the devil’s crew.”
Some one asked whether a husband and wife,
not too congenial in this life, were together
there, and was told that he was “flocking with
birds of his own feather,” and that she had
“peacefully and tranquilly found her own.”
Another member of this family group was with
neither of the others, it was said, “because
she found her very own, for which they were
only a substitute.”
“Have you seen Jim? Is there any feeling
about his wife’s marrying again?” was a question
which will interest many persons.
“Jim is here and very happy. He has no
resentment, and wishes Alice to be happy.
They are both of the forces of progress, but
not of just the same purpose. They harmonize,
but do not touch.”
Again, some one asked whether one party
to an uncongenial marriage regretted the
other’s rejoining him so soon.
“She didn’t,” was the reply. “He hasn’t seen
her yet, and won’t. He is willing to work with
her purpose, but not eager to touch her force.”
“What about Laura?” a woman asked.
“She is coming to us soon, but do not be
afraid, dear. She will be tenderly met and
guided, and will be much nearer you all, much
happier and more helpful, than she is now.
Never grieve again for death. It is birth, and
so happy.”
Within a few weeks, this came to pass.
When I asked Mary K. for a message for a
mother bereaved by war, she said: “Tell her
we will send for her when he has grown accustomed
enough to talk to her. Tell her that he
is cared for tenderly and guided, and that she
must not grieve. She hurts him and herself.
Make her understand that she can help him
by knowing that he lives and loves her and is
near her, and that it is part of her work as
a mother to help him in this ... to find his
purpose more quickly through her love.”
We were afterward told that he had not yet
learned the “free communion,” but that from
the moment his mother began to “lift her
spirit to meet his,” this young man’s development
was hastened.
Frequently, when telling about these revelations,
I have been asked: “What do they say
about reincarnation?”
“There is no possible reincarnation,” Mary
K. said, when I referred the question to her.
“That is a dream of the Orient. The idea of
reincarnation is regressive. Not destructive,
but deterrent. Not progressive. It is born of
bodily desire.”
“Is it like the desire of old men for youth?”
“More. It is a mask, covering material
desire with spiritual semblance. It is taught
from this plane by deterrent or partly deterrent
forces, lacking free vision.”
In another connection, but with similar
meaning, David Bruce said: “Some persons
hide their love of the flesh by an exaggerated
expression of spirituality, and then think of
ways of insisting on the flesh.”
Similarly, writing through her husband’s
pencil, Mary Kendal said, when he asked her
what had become of persons like Cæsar, Luther,
Cobden, Archimedes, and others in general:
“There is a great difference in the length of
time people stay in this plane nearest to that
of the earth, which depends not only on the
stage of development which they have attained
when they come here, but also on the character
of work they are best fitted to do. If they
can be of more use in direct or indirect contact
with your plane, they stay here sometimes
many years, as you measure time; but if they
are retarded in their development when they
arrive here, they have a long road to travel
before they can go on to any other plane.
There is no such thing as transmigration of
souls as you understand it, but that idea is
akin to what actually does happen, in the sense
that such individualities have to pass through
stages of development which are relatively
inferior in status to those that they might
enter into, coming from your plane, if they
had made greater progress there, or had fought
a better fight on that plane.”
When he said that his idea in asking about
specific individuals was to get concrete instances
by which to check up the general law,
she returned: “The danger in that is that
your idea of what those individuals really were
is very apt to be wrong, and starting from
wrong premises you could hardly avoid reaching
wrong conclusions.... Martin Luther was
a mixture of purposes. He did great work for
progress in fighting the conventions and binding
tendency of ecclesiasticism in his times,
but he had personal motives which were deterrent,
and which he spent a long time in
working out when he left that plane.” Of
Napoleon she said: “There have been few instances
of greater prostitution of great talents
and great opportunity in history, and he paid—and
is paying—the penalty, or the consequence.”
To the many inquiries as to how direct
communication may be established between
persons here and the dear ones gone before,
this message of David Bruce’s to his wife contains
the briefest and most comprehensive
answer.
She said: “I wonder what he’s going to tell
me?”
“I’m going to tell you to be calm and serene
of spirit, no matter what seems to be happening
to disturb you. Most of the disturbing
factors of individual life on your plane are
ephemeral—things of the moment and of the
place. Others are more important than they
seem. I am not always able to tell you about
them. It delays you, instead of helping you,
when the decision is not your own. One way
that I can truly help when you are troubled
is by what we can best describe as the free
communion. When you are perturbed in spirit
and full of doubt, it is difficult for us to reach
you.... Open the door of spiritual force to
forces here, and we can always help. That is
what we hope to establish as a recognized
truth in your life there. That a force as yet
unknown to science is operating between the
planes, and can be developed and used in your
life there—to a less degree than in ours, but
still with great effect. It is for this that we
work in this communion, which is more definite
to you now and less so to us. We know the
limits to which material manifestation like this
is confined, and are eager to teach you gradually
the freer and fuller way.”
“A thought that will occur to many persons
is that the truths we endeavor to teach are not
entirely new.
“Truth is fundamental and eternal. There
is no new truth; there is only new understanding
and application of truth that has always
existed. No great teacher has ever told new
truth. No great teacher has ever told truth
in a new way, until the older teachings had
begun to lose their hold on the minds of
men. No great teacher has ever found an
audience for his new interpretation of truth,
until the minds of men had groped through
darkness toward a light dimly perceived, if
at all.
“The time is ripe now for the crystallization
of new application of eternal truth. Men
hunger for bread of the spirit, and thirst for
the waters of eternity. This is the answer of
eternal forces to their search, and it comes,
for the first time, not through a teacher or a
prophet, but through a human instrument
sensitive to a high degree to the influence of
the force that is life’s motive power.
“There are many conditions affecting the
application of that force in these communications,
that cannot now be explained; many
conditions influencing its direction, that you
do not understand. Some day your scientists
will discover and prove by experiment certain
laws now unrecognized, and these days of
doubt and scoffing will disappear in a past filled
with denial and discouragement of almost every
discovery now called modern and progressive.
“Two things only we have striven for through
you: to prove to a group of intelligent persons
that this force exists and may be practically
applied between your plane and ours, and to
warn mankind of the nature and eternal import
of impending struggles. We have more
to tell when they are ready to listen, and upon
the choice of them who hear this truth the
immediate progress of the world depends. It
is a warning to unite and prepare for combat.
“This is the truth. Heed it.
“Mary K.”
June 13, 1918.
THE END