Resources Discussing John V. Dittemore

Due to the long-standing debate over Mary Baker Eddy’s use of morphine, the Mary Baker Eddy Library sought to resolve it in order to restore focus on Eddy’s larger record. Calvin Frye’s diaries had recorded several instances of Eddy’s use of morphine, but some claimed his diaries had been altered. A forensic analysis in 2021 concluded the diaries are reliable.

Swensen documents how, in the fifteen years after the passing of Mary Baker Eddy (1910-1925), the Christian Science Board of Directors consolidated and centralized their authority both at Church headquarters and over local branch churches. Mirroring a corporate business model, church organization, administration, and standardization were merged with obedience and loyalty. 

This well-researched biography of Emma Curtis Hopkins, little-known founder of the 19th-century New Thought movement, includes Hopkins’s early-stage affiliation with Mary Baker Eddy—her tutelage by Eddy and editorship of The Christian Science Journal for 13 months before being suddenly discharged. Harley draws on a range of scholarship to contextualize the complexity of this knotty developmental stage of Christian Science.

Gill, a feminist historian and biographer, offers a fresh view of Mary Baker Eddy’s achievements in the light of obstacles faced by women in her time. Without access to Church archives Gill relied on Peel’s archival research. Gill’s unique contribution challenges the traditional biographers’ view of Eddy as a hysterical invalid who abandoned her son and stole her ideas.

Houpt’s book contains valuable primary sources for the history of Christian Science in the decades before and after Mary Baker Eddy’s death in 1910. It covers the life and career of Bliss Knapp, who devoted his life to serving Eddy and her cause. He is best known as the leading proponent of Eddy’s prophetic role as the woman in the Apocalypse.

Braden’s book includes a recap of accusations of Mary Baker Eddy’s plagiarism in her writings, the struggles and abuses of power through and after the ‘Great Litigation,’ and the identification of what he finds are inconsistencies in Science and Health and class teaching.

This book constitutes Beasley’s response to requests from readers of his first book, The Cross and the Crown, for the history of the Christian Science movement from 1910 to the book’s 1956 publication. Not a Christian Scientist himself, he made good use of public documents covering the controversial ‘Great Litigation,’ court cases on health-laws, as well as successful church programs.

This unique outsider-insider perspective is apparent in this biography. He seeks to present a full, frank, and generally appreciative picture of Mary Baker Eddy’s life and thought, and details her development in ways not portrayed at that date in biographies published by her Church. However, Aruthur Corey, a dissident critic of Eddy’s Church, later redacted portions unlike Studdert-Kennedy’s original work.

Prior to the publication of this book, Dittemore served in official capacities of the Christian Science Church. He was voted out of office in 1919, and he describes the motives behind his bitter campaign against the Church based on his (later proved to be false) belief in Mary Baker Eddy’s plagiarism. His accusations originated in an internal Church squabble.

Studdert-Kennedy presents the minority (and ultimately losing) view of the legal battle that erupted 10 years after Eddy’s passing known as the ‘Great Litigation’ that nearly brought Eddy’s church and publishing arm to a halt. This three-year trial would determine whether authority rested with the Christian Science Board of Directors who governed the Church or the Trustees of the Publishing Society.

…interpretation of Eddy’s Church Manual estoppel clause (that certain decisions could only occur with the approval of Eddy, the Pastor Emeritus.) Bill argues that a Leader of the Church was…

​​This historically important book, available through the Mary Baker Eddy Library, records the court transcripts in their entirety of what later came to be known as the ‘Great Litigation.’ The case was argued between the Trustees of the 1898 Deed of Trust of the Christian Science Publishing Society and the Christian Science Board of Directors.