See also: P.1
As a prime example of
"new thought," The Power of Positive Thinking", by Norman Vincent
Peale (who credited Ernest Holmes), sold 2 million copies within just a few
years .
During the initial
years of what came to be called "new thought"; Mary Baker Eddy was
working the East Coast, two students of her teacher; Phineas Parkhurst Quimby,
Julius Dresser and Annetta Seabury Dresser, made their way to Boston and began
to teach and practice there.
For Julius Dresser,
at least, the mental healing ministry he now took up represented a decided
about-face. Not two weeks after Eddy's catalytic fall on the ice in Lynn, she
had written to Dresser for mental healing support, but-in Yarmouth, Maine,
working as a journalist-he had expressed a remoteness from Quimby and a
disregard for his work. Sixteen years later, however, and living in California,
Julius Dresser changed his mind. He came back east and took Christian Science
lessons with his wife, Annetta, from Edward J. Arens,
Eddy's former student and now strong enemy. For whatever reasons (Eddy's recent
biographer Gillian Gill suggests greed; the New Thought account, anger and
upset that Eddy was no longer acknowledging Quimby), the Dressers immersed
themselves in the work. They did so in a Boston that, by the 1880s, was rife
with metaphysical healers, numbers of them former Eddy students. It was this
mix of independent mental healers and former Eddyites,
often now assuming the generic Christian Science name, that coalesced as New
Thought in the decade that followed.1
Exchanges between the
Eddy group and the looser mental healing community were generally conflictual,
with controversy over Quimby dominating much of the public discourse. (At least
this is the story as it was later reconstructed in the nonprofessional first
history of New Thought by the philosopher son of the Dressers, Horatio Dresser.)
But the healing work went on -lessons, practice, and wider public lectures. So
did the work of an emerging New Thought press, with books and periodicals that
underlined the cognizing instincts of the mental science confraternity. The
Dressers produced a circular in 1884, and by 1887 Julius Dresser saw the
publication of his book The True History of Mental Science. The comprehensive
nature of the movement's purview was indicated by some of these early works.
For example, Mathilda J. Barnett's Practical Metaphysics (1887), according to
J. Stillson Judah, reflected theosophical principles
in its exposition of metaphysics; William J. Colville's Spiritual Science of
Health and Healing the same year expressed his own background in spiritualism
with the "inspirational" suggestion of its extended title.2
The Church of the
Divine Unity (where Dresser-himself once a candidate for the Calvinist Baptist
ministry - had delivered the lectures later incorporated into his
mental-science book) became one of the first of the quasi-New Thought Churches.
It had been founded in 1886 by Jonathan W. Winktey,
once a Unitarian Minister and also an Eddy follower, who would later, in 1900,
inaugurate the Journal Practical Ideals. A year earlier, from 1885, Elizabeth
Stuart-an Arens student (after he had broken with
Eddy) who went on to take a Christian Sience course
from Eddy in 1881--:" became the catalyst for the formation of "Light
Love, Truth" in Massachusetts and New York. A Connecticut group was
brought under the aegis of the organization in 1888, and in each of its
locations, according to Gary Ward Materra, all of the
known officers were women.3
From its early
beginnings, however, the emerging New Thought movement vas national in scope -
a reality obscured by the East Coast orientation of Horatio Dresser's
pioneering history (with its preoccupation with the Quimby-Eddy controversy)
and its shaping influence on subsequent scholarship. Newer work, thought, has
told a different story of widespread New Thought foundations, beginning in the
1880s in the Midwest and Far West and spreading to numerous locations.
"The movement's heart and soul lay in the western states," Beryl Satter has observed. In a networking pattern that imitated
seance spiritualism and, on a smaller scale, Theosophy and that augured the
future of metaphysics, New Thought women and men fanned out as independent
healer-teachers in places large and small. By 1902, an article in the American
Monthly Review of Reviews claimed over a million followers. If anyone figure
could be identified as a major influence on the early phases of this growth,
that person was Emma Curtis Hopkins (1849-1925). Indeed, both J. Gordon Melton
and Gail M. Harley have read her as the "founder" of New Thought, and
although that assessment arguably 'versimplifies the
complexity of an act of foundation, it does point to the abiding importance of
Hopkins's role. Even in the 1960s, Charles Braden acknowledged her reputation
in New Thought circles as "the teacher's teacher.”4
Who was Emma Curtis
Hopkins? What did she do for New Thought theology and practice to suggest the
titles that scholars have conferred on her, and how lid
she do it? Born in a Connecticut farming family as Josephine Emma Curtis, he
acquired some education and married George Irving Hopkins, a high-school
English teacher, in 1874. Their son John Carver Hopkins lived until 1905, but
'y that time his parents had long been separated, and his father had divorced
his mother for "abandonment." What Hopkins had abandoned her husband
for ,as the Christian Science teaching of Mary Baker Eddy. She had met Eddy in
Manchester, New Hampshire, where Hopkins was living, had listened to Eddy
testify to Christian Science, and had experienced a healing that she attributed
to one work of the local Christian Science practitioner. After an exchange of
letters, Hopkins traveled to Boston, enrolled in an Eddy class at the end of
1883, and by 1884 was listed as a practitioner in The Journal of Christian
Science. The same year she resigned from the Congregational church of her
childhood to become a member of the First Church of Christ, Scientist, in
Boston. A few months later she was working without pay as editor of Eddy's
journal.5
But the honeymoon
period in Hopkins's relationship with Eddy was soon over. For reasons that are
shrouded and unclear but that suggest, most persuasively, the 1885 editorial
"'Masters of Metaphysics;' Hopkins was dismissed after some thirteen
months and ordered out of her (Christian Science) lodging. Satter
has noted Hopkins's mystical language in the piece, with the editor-after
contact with Eddy's teaching on "Spiritual Being" -claiming to know
God "face to face" and thus implying, at least for Eddy, that Hopkins
was her peer. Hopkins wrote that she had "realized the reward 'to him that
overcometh' for an interval brief but long enough to
fix forever in my mind the sweet consummation of faithful endeavor."
Others have pointed to Hopkins's friendship with another student, Mary
Plunkett, who for a variety of reasons was troubling Eddy.6 At any rate,
Hopkins was never given any explanation, and she never publicly repudiated
Eddy; in fact she wrote her letters, even after the firing, to express her
regard for her former teacher. Still, from the first, Hopkins had been moving
to a drumbeat different from the one that Eddy heard. Her earliest article for
Eddy's Christian Science journal already signaled her theosophical interests,
and her theology would develop in the immanentist and
mystical directions that marked New Thought. Hopkins was also decidedly
feminist, interested in social-action causes, intimate - especially in her
later New York years - with a literary and artistic community, and considerably
tolerant of views other than her own. Publicly, she continued to maintain the
low profile that made her barely visible in earlier histories of New Thought.
Hopkins moved to
Chicago after leaving Eddy, first editing Andrew J. Swarts's Mind Cure Journal
and then, with Mary Plunkett, establishing the Emma Curtis Hopkins College of
Christian Science in 1886. One report from the 1920s claimed that some six
hundred students participated in Hopkins's classes within a year. Meanwhile,
the students formed the Hopkins Metaphysical Association, which spawned
branches in numerous other places. Even with her teaching responsibilities,
Hopkins did not stay home but traveled around the country to offer classes and
form further outposts for her organization. For example, in 1887 she was in San
Francisco, where she met Malinda Cramer, who later went on to found, with Nona
Brooks, the Church of Divine Science. Later in the year Hopkins taught in
Milwaukee and then in New York City, where her class included H. Emilie Cady.
Hopkins and Plunkett together created Truth magazine as the official voice of
the local Hopkins Metaphysical Associations, the national convention of which
they held in Boston toward the end of 1887. By the end of that year, according
to Materra, the Hopkins groups numbered twenty-one,
extending from Maine to California and functioning as the earliest national New
Thought organization.7
Plunkett (and her
husband) subsequently moved to New York City, taking Truth with them and
changing its name to The International Magazine of Christian Science. There
followed a period of some cooperation and also the birth of a new Chicago
journal called Christian Science, edited by Ida Nichols with much support from
Hopkins. But Mary Plunkett's "spiritual marriage" to A. Bentley
Worthington (later exposed as a bigamist with at least eight wives)-while she
was legally married to John Plunkett- heaped scandal on the New Thought effort
in New York. Plunkett and Worthington found it opportune to resettle in
Christchurch, New Zealand, and to carryon their New
Thought work there. In Chicago, however, Hopkins and her teaching remained
relatively unscathed. More important, it had become independent, and, in the
context of the upheaval, Hopkins converted her college into a seminary and
ordained its graduates, overwhelmingly women. "Christian Science is not a
business or profession," she was reported to have said. "It is a
ministry."8 Her Christian Science Theological Seminary functioned
successfully until 1894, when-fatigued by her efforts on many fronts and by
infighting at the seminary-she moved to New York City. She conducted classes
and did healing work there, traveling on the East Coast and also to England and
Italy. During her Chicago time, Hopkins taught Charles and Myrtle Fillmore, who
founded Unity, and during her New York years, she taught Ernest Holmes, who founded
Religious Science. Nona Brooks, who studied with Hopkins, co-founded Divine
Science with Cramer; still another student, Annie Rix Militz,
founded the Homes of Truth; and yet another, Frances Lord, carried New Thought
to England. Hopkins's student Helen (Nellie) Van Anderson in 1894 began the
self-consciously New Thought group in Boston called the "Church of the
Higher Life." A series of other Hopkins students, well known in movement
circles, spread out across the nation, bringing the Hopkins brand of metaphysics
to numerous local communities.
We get a rare
vignette of the Hopkins teaching style during the Chicago years in one news
report from the Kansas City Christian Science Thought for 1890' There Hopkins,
who was teaching a class at the Kansas City College of Christian Science, is
portrayed as a charismatic woman with extraordinary powers. The unnamed author
(was it Charles Fillmore, who edited the journal?) told readers: "After an
eloquent burst of oratory, the teacher said with a peculiar quiet vehemence,
'God is Life, Love and Truth,' long tongues of flame shot out from her vicinity
and filled the room with a rosy light that continued throughout the remainder
of the lecture to roll over the class in waves and ripples of what seemed
golden sunlight." The writer apparently had checked with others.
"Many saw it plainly while others sensed its uplifting presence in the
room. We felt that we had almost experienced a modern day of Pentacost."9
Gail Harley, however,
has distinguished between Hopkins's Chicago years and her New York period, and
the distinction is a useful one.10 The Chicago Hopkins followed the Eddy,
gospel more faithfully, although, to be sure, she departed from it in marked
and consistent ways. In the New York years, by contrast, Hopkins barely
reiterated the basic Christian Science formula regarding the nonexistence of
matter and mostly soared into a mystical stratosphere that seemed to reflect
direct experience as well as-most likely-Evans, Blavatsky, and similar sources.
In both periods, though, Hopkins's material was mostly derivative-one reason
why the "founder" attribution seems strained at best-although, as we
will see, in at least two ways she did introduce new material or emphases into
the theological mix that became New Thought. Beryl Satter
has argued that Hopkins attracted people with quite different perspectives
because she brought together both Eddy and Evans, and Hopkins certainly did
that. Even here, however, she had probably been preceded in uniting Eddy with
Evans by the former Methodist minister and spiritualist Andrew J. Swarts and
his mediumistic wife, Katie L. Swarts, in their Mental Science school in
Chicago. More than that, in Hopkins's work the alliance of Eddy and Evans was
far more uneasy than the Satter analysis allows.11
The tensions in the theological constructions of Quimby and Evans emerge from
their work as somewhat soft and malleable- cracks in the structure on the order
of the now-classic crack in Emerson's Nature. By contrast, Eddy opted for
greater consistency and greater absolutism. It remained for Hopkins to attempt
a union of the absolutism of the Eddy Christian Science message with the
plasticity of the Evans construction. In brief, Evans was theosophical; Eddy
was not. Hopkins did not unify their teaching but rather juxtaposed it. If
there was a resolution at all, it came only in the New York period when
Hopkins's High Mysticism paid lip service to Eddy but mostly spent its energies
(and readers') in an impassioned declaration of what, by the mid-twentieth
century and after Aldous Huxley, would become known as the perennial
philosophy.12
Hopkins's publishing
habits made it difficult for later admirers to gather her corpus effectively.
Often, she produced pamphlets that constitute brief monograph lessons-almost
sermons-on selected themes. Her Bible lessons appeared in the Chicago
Inter-Ocean (newspaper) from 1890 through 1898. Other publications include
class lessons that she had used in her teachings and her ordination addresses.
Thus her publishing history is hard at best to reconstruct. For all that,
enough material is available to provide snapshots of the Hopkins theology at
key points in her metaphysical career, and these snapshots tell us that through
the teaching of Hopkins, gradually Mary Baker Eddy quietly shifted backstage in
the New Thought community and a more globally inclusive Evans style moved to
the center. This is true even if in later New Thought, as we will see, only one
of two major wings of the movement could trace its instincts to the Hopkins
theology-a situation that, again, makes the attribution of New Thought
foundation to Hopkins problematic.
Hopkins's first
article in Eddy's Journal of Christian Science (April 1884) provides already an
important clue to the different (from Eddy) cultural world in which she lived.
In a piece of eleven brief paragraphs, Hopkins managed to cite "Buddhist
Nirvana," ''Algazel, a Mohammedan philosopher of the twelfth century;'
Spinoza, Confucius, the Persian "Zend-Avest;'
the Chandogya Upanishad, the "Persian Desatir," and the Hebrews. She sometimes quoted from
these sources, no doubt as they were quoted in other works- Evans?-she had been
reading. Her point was God's omnipresence and the "blessed evidence"
she found of "universal goodness" and divine "impartiality"
in the manifestation of God "to every people and nation of the
earth." By November of the same year, for all God's universality, she was
hailing the special manifestation of the divine in the Christian Science
founder. Eddy's direct predecessor in giving the world a "system of
ethics" with health as its "practical application" was
"Jesus, the Christ." And in an apparent allusion to the Quimby
controversy, Hopkins defended Eddy in remarkably feminist terms. From "many
quarters" came "the bold denial of her right to her own work."
Why was this so? "Because it is a woman whom God hath chosen, this time,
to be His messenger, and not Jesus or Sau!." Hopkins pushed on to the
general conclusion: "But Woman's hour has struck. Who can doubt it? The
motherhood of God beats in the bosom of time, with waking energy,
today."13
As Gail Harley has
shown, the Mother God -more noticeably than the FatherMother
God of Eddy-was a distinct (and new) Hopkins emphasis. In a millennialist
division of history that echoed the twelfth-century Joachim of Fiore or the
later Emanuel Swedenborg with his announcement, reiterated in Evans, of a New
Age, Hopkins proclaimed a coming third age of the Holy Ghost. This Holy Ghost,
however, was distinctly feminine - identified with the Shekinah of the Hebrew
Bible as well as with the New Testament Spirit-and was also a sign of a
feminist future to be. The coming age would be a better era than before, and
Hopkins-far more than Eddy-avidly supported social reform causes. Meanwhile,
her pamphlet essay The Ministry of the Holy Mother appeared during her Chicago
years. In it the divine Mother was conjoined to both the Spirit and ministry of
God in a mystical statement that was also a declaration about service and about
Hopkins's conviction that any adequate idea of God required the feminine.14
Likewise, her ordination addresses during these years regularly invoked the
motherhood of God in the Holy Spirit. The Father-Mother God was still in
charge, for Hopkins, and was never eclipsed by a sole reliance on the Mother.
Still, the Mother received her due in Hopkins's thinking more than the divine
feminine ever would later in New Thought. After the leadership of women in the
initiating years of the movement, by the early decades of the twentieth century
a new generation of women would rise to prominence as leaders, and the Mother
would recede.
A second new emphasis
in Hopkins survived - indeed blatantly - in the New Thought movement. This was
Hopkins's evolving gospel of prosperity, a teaching that may have been related
to her own struggle with poverty in the early years of her failed marriage with
George Irving Hopkins. In fact, when Hopkins first negotiated with Eddy to
become part of a Christian Science class in Boston, she had to explain her
husband's indebtedness and her inability to come up with funding to support her
educational goals. She worked out a special arrangement with Eddy.15
Hence, as early
as Hopkins's "Ordination Address" to her first graduating class of
seminarians published in 1889, she was subtly noticing more than divine healing
activity. She saw her graduates among those who were "ministers of the
gospel of The Good," and she pointed to the work of Jesus in which
"the poor were helped and fed." She linked her class with those who
proclaimed a "New Dispensation of the Holy Spirit;' a new order
"wherein the poor may be taught and befriended, women walk fearless and
glad, and childhood be safe and free." Christian Scientists, for her,
declared "the omnipresence of God the Good and deny the presence or
working power of any other Principle but the Good." More than that, it was
women, linked to the "Mother God" in "the Holy Spirit of
Scripture;' who especially pointed toward the emphatic reading of God as good. "Woman's
voice - the mother heart of the world," Hopkins told her graduates, was
now proclaiming "the omnipresence, omnipotence and omniscience of The
Good."16
These suggestions
grew less subtle in Hopkins's formal lecture from the Chicago period "How
to Attain Your Good." Cast in a markedly different frame from Eddy's
Christian Science, Hopkins's work began with a theosophical and Evans-style
"fine etheric Substance pervading all the worlds of the universe."
Hopkins called it "Cosmic Substance" and supplied as synonyms for it
"Mother" or "Mother-Principle" as well as
"God-Substance." The human mind was "made out of this
omnipresent Mother," and the "etheric substance" that "the
common thought and word use" was "only a rough shadowing forth of the
truly omnipresent Substance." The ancient Egyptians (not the Hebrews)
called it "the I Am of the world;' and Jesus called it "Spirit"
and a series of other titles including "God," "Father," and
"Love." Hopkins herself said it was the "Good-Substance."
She went on to
invoke, like a mantra, a repeated affirmation: "There is good for me, and
I ought to have it." What did the good mean for the aspiring Truth
student? Among the series of explanations, many of them generic and noetic,
Hopkins found her way to tangibility and profit. "Everything is really
full of love for you. You love the good that is for you;' she told students.
"You can make the connection between yourself and prosperity by saying
that the good that is for you is love." With God equated with
"Love" and "Good," "all things poured down blessings
into the lap of Jesus Christ because he knew everything loved him."17 So,
apparently, would it happen for truth students. If the New Thought Statement of
Being posited Good at its center, it followed that abundance on earth was one result.
In Scientific
Christian Mental Practice, also a product of the Chicago years, Hopkins
continued to weave a gospel of prosperity quietly into her teaching. Here was
none of the flamboyance that would come to characterize the later New Thought
pursuit of the prosperous, nor any of the mechanical formulas that would by
then accompany the prosperity message. In a work structured-like Eddy's own
work-on denials, first, and then affirmations; Hopkins announced to readers a
series of five "universal affirmations." Here the first began
"my Good is my God," and the others moved in increasingly mystical
directions, invoking identity with Spirit, with the "I AM" presence,
and with an absence of the ability to sin. With the use of the "right
word" and the proclamation of one's freedom, she told readers, each of
them would "soon be more prosperous." Scientists should experience
neither poverty nor grief, and one of the things they should do was to
"talk for prosperity," using the affirmation "I believe in
prosperity and success." They should "covenant with Spirit" for
support and do nothing for it, because support was "the providence of the
Spirit." In a negative example, Hopkins held up one pastor of an English
mission who "was very much pleased that he got his expenses paid by
praying for them, and had about $14.00 left over." Her unflattering
conclusion: ''As all the wealth of the earth was offered him you can see that
he was not especially honoring God by having such a little bit at his
disposal." By contrast, Hopkins's good news of prosperity was predictive.
"Men may gather all the gold into a lump, and say you cannot have any, but
by some way of the Spirit you will come out with more abundant riches than all
the rest put together."18
By the time Hopkins
wrote the material in High Mysticism, healing, prosperity, and similar concerns
receded before a unitive consciousness that dominates the studies that formed
the book. Evoking "John the Revelator" in a series of twelve
visionary explorations probably first published separately, Hopkins's work
illustrates why the harmoniallabel is problematic not
only for Christian Science but also for a major lineage of New Thought. If the
word harmony appears from time to time in Hopkins's discourse, her message is
hardly one of "rapport with the cosmos." Instead, a radical immanence
prevails in these studies, in which the language of Self-recognition and the
God-Self translates the theosophized religiosity of a
dizzying catalog of traditions into an American New Thought argot. These were
surely traditions imbibed at second hand - from Evans and perhaps Blavatsky
(Hopkins at least once referred to the "secret doctrine," the title
of Madame Blavatsky's seminal work to be examined next) and similar authors.
What is important here, however, is how Hopkins shaped them into American
metaphysics. "When half gods go the gods arrive;' announced Hopkins, and
she staked out the required denials (no evil, matter, loss or lack or
deprivation, fearful thing, sin or sickness or death). But they cleared the way
for affirmations that while they certainly reproduce the health and blessing of
New Thought expectation-are something more: mystical statements of divine
identity that mince no words and leave no space for human failure.
"Highest God and inmost God is One God," Hopkins declared. "Our
own Soul, our own free Spirit forever says, in bold faith, 'I am Truth, I am
God-Omnipresence, Omnipotence, Omniscience.''19
Hopkins was evoking
what I am calling the enlightened body-self, a construction of human personality
and life that had been presaged in a vernacular American context as far back as
the early Mormonism of Joseph Smith with its message of a divine future for
humans. For Hopkins and the new American metaphysics, however, the future was
now, and the future was here on earth. If the transcendent had become immanent
in this Christian world gone theosophical, where the mystical language of many
traditions pointed toward a secret Self that moved the world, somehow the
ego-ennobled, transfigured, and exalted, but still the ego - had tiptoed behind
the Self. What resulted was not quite the crass and glib formula that has been
applied dismissively to New Thought - "health and wealth and
metaphysics." What followed, still, was something more tangible, more practical
and concrete, than the already-pragmatism of the Hermetic past - and this
because it more boldly championed the garden of delight on an earth properly
viewed and employed. Beryl Satter's reading of a
debate and then a shift from an anti-desire rhetoric in New Thought to a clear
language of desire in the early twentieth century surely speaks to the point
here.20 The secret and this-worldly history of the Self would be a leading
reason why, by the twentieth century, as we shall see, some Americans became
interested in South Asian tantrism. And this was why, too, in their unitive
consciousness many metaphysicians turned like earlier spiritualists and
Theosophists-to concerns about social reform. As New Thought read the script,
the soul's journey in the hereafter paled before the significance of a mystical
present that could be paradise.
The New Thought Hermeticists were mostly white and middle class, and they
linked their vision of paradise to the progressivism of their era. Interest in
woman suffrage and a general feminist agenda ran high, as it had for Hopkins,
but metaphysicians branched out to embrace other issues and causes as well. In
fact, Gary Ward Materra has argued that the Hopkins
brand of New Thought represented one of two-divergent styles in the early
movement. Materra identifies it as
"affective" in orientation, characterized by "emphasis on the
Bible, healing, and the needs of families and communities." Hopkins and
those who imitated her understood their enterprise as religion through and through.
They held to a vision of unity among all things and people, thought about
relational ethics, and were concerned, for example, about their children as
well as about church building and networking. Predominantly women, they were
often feminists and social activists, unabashed in their criticism of
prevailing social and economic mores and willing to entertain ideas of social
reconstruction that extended, sometimes, even to socialism. A number of New
Thought women found fault with capitalism in its unrelieved pursuit of profit
for its own sake, even as they worked to improve the conditions of the poor.21
Examples abound
within the Hopkins Metaphysical Association and outside it. Helen van Anderson,
in Boston, used the church she formed to encourage a Young People's Club as a
service organization for "hospitals, reformatories, or private
homes," while a different committee brought New Thought teachings to poor
and sick people in their own communities. The Circle of Divine Ministry in New
York City in 1897 decided to open a room "in the lower part of the city;'
so that "some much-neglected classes of its inhabitants, boys and
so-called criminals" could be reached. The Denver-based Church of Divine
Science staffed a day nursery for the children of working-class mothers, and
the church also aided a group that worked with tuberculosis-ridden men without
means. Nona Brooks, its co-founder, spent seven years as the secretary of the
Colorado Prison Association. In San Francisco, the earliest Home of Truth
offered free meals and clothing to the poor through a branch office. The San
Francisco Home of Truth also for a time created a shelter for homeless men.23
New Thought people
threw themselves into the settlement house movement of the end of the century,
beginning a metaphysical version of a settlement house in 1895 in the Roxbury
District of Boston. They also moved to riskier public stances, as, for
instance, in the outspoken antiwar rhetoric of Catherine Barton and Elizabeth
Towne. Nor were analyses of social problems simplistic and naive. Barton, for
example, commented on crime and criminals with the observation of shared guilt
on the part of all: "We have so constructed our social, ethical, and
religious fabric that crime is a natural outcome." Anita Trueman did not think that New Thought, with its prosperity
thinking, would by itself cure the condition of a man out of a job because of
economic depression. Rather, New Thought believers needed to "readjust
those conditions which enrich the monopolist while he robs the people of even
the opportunity to work."24 Meanwhile, as Beryl Satter
notes, individuals with New Thought ties, such as Abby Molion
Diaz and Mary Livermore, embraced the form of socialism advocated by Edward
Bellamy's novel Looking Backward (1888), which brought in its train a series of
Bellamy Clubs across the nation. Former Episcopalian pastor R. Heber Newton in
1885 had joined Richard Ely's American Economic Association with its advocacy
of government intervention on behalf of the disadvantaged but by 1899 found in
New Thought a religion that buttressed his politics better than Episcopalianism had. He presided over the International
Metaphysical League in 1900, 1902, and 1906, and he served as an officer in the
New Thought Federation in 1904. Congregationalist minister Benjamin Fay Mills,
with a history of attacking monopolies and praising socialism, likewise became
a New Thought fellow traveler by 1905, founding a Los Angeles
"Fellowship," which Satter describes as
"indistinguishable" in its beliefs and goals from New Thought. Other
reforming clergy among Protestants also moved into New Thought-among them Hugh
O. Pentecost, Henry Frank, J. Stitt Wilson, and George Herron. They sought, as Satter recounts, the victory of" 'altruism over
selfism'" as well as the pursuit of human perfection.25
Ralph Waldo Trine,
author of the classic In Tune with the Infinite (1897), was an out-and-out New Thought
socialist. But he was hardly alone, and much of his company was female. Indeed,
Materra concludes on the basis of his study that
"women forged the primary links between New Thought and socialism."
Thus Malinda Cramer, who co-founded Divine Science, castigated the
"competitive system" as the "offspring of brute evolution"
that bore "no relation to the divine methods of 'each for all, and all for
each.''' Josephine Conger, who spent two years at radical Ruskin College in Trenton,
Missouri, and there converted to socialism, later threw herself into the
socialist women's movement. She functioned as its leading editor and at the
same time acknowledged her New Thought commitments in the socialist print
periodical world. "All the great men and women of the world have believed
in what we call New Thought," she told readers of a 1903 issue of Appeal
to Reason. Moreover, if a socialist organ such as Appeal to Reason could miss
ionize for New Thought, at least one New Thought paper, Social Ethics, was also
the official mouthpiece of the Socialist party in the state of Kansas.
Similarly, The New Life of Lewiston, Idaho, straddled the line between its New
Thought origins and its later socialist testimonies.26
What was it about New
Thought that fostered socialism and a social action agenda, in general? Part of
the answer lies in the vernacular environment in which early New Thought
flourished - with its historic roots in mid century
spiritualism and the reform commitments that came as part of spiritualist
social culture. When the cultural turn of the 1870s occurred and a generalized
theosophical perspective was born, reform commitments continued to run high, as
the official Theosophical Society retoric of the
"brotherhood of man" suggests. The Midwestern and western spread of
New Thought-to areas less immured in tradition than the bastions of East Coast
conservatism - also brought with it a populace more likely to turn in liberal,
and radical, social directions. Kansas, after all, had not acquired a
reputation as a radical state for nothing. However, beyond these social reasons
for a New Thought-socialist and social-reform alliance, the theological vision
of the New Thought movement needs to be noticed. A message of divine immanence
and unity, of all as children of the one God the Good, from one perspective sat
well with social reform for a more even distribution of goods. Put another way,
socialism provided a better conceptual fit for New Thought than did
laissez-faire or capitalist pursuit of individual aggrandizement, pace Donald
Meyer's well-known reading of the "mind-cure" gospel of success.27
For all this
social-action agenda within New Thought, however, a second style -one that made
Meyer at least partly right-came to dominate New Thought after the new century
began. Materra calls it "noetic." In some
sense, even this style could be laid, technically, at the feet of Hopkins,
because its early representative - with whom Materra
associates the noetic wing initially - was Helen Wilmans
(1832-1907), who had begun her New Thought career as a Hopkins student. Wilmans, however, struck out on her own and never
acknowledged a debt to her Chicago teacher. For her, New Thought counted as a
business and a science of self-mastery-she called it Mental Science-and Wilmans used the mails so ostentatiously for her
absent-healing business that she spent years in court fighting mail fraud
charges (she was acquitted, but her work never recovered).28
We gain some purchase
on what this noetic New Thought signaled and how it sat with Hopkins devotees
in a revelatory editorial by Charles Fillmore, cofounder of Unity, in one
number of his periodical Thought. "Helen Wilmans,"
he confessed to readers, "objects to my use of the words God, Father, etc .... She says 'Why not credit the power spoken of to man's creativeness and the source of supply to nature
instead of God?'" He went on, after the gentlemanly courtesies, to tell
readers that a "great deal" hinged "on Words," with their
use "worthy our careful consideration." Fillmore voted for a theistic
language and told readers why. By contrast, the noetic style of Wilmans and a series of others, including New Thought women
Julia Seton Sears and Elizabeth Towne, points toward more secular concerns,
emphasizing entry into a "privileged male world as full
participants." This style encouraged prosperity thinking much more than
Hopkins and the affective wing of New Thought did, and it saw the new ideas as
supports for greater self-reliance and business success. Here the individualism
of adults in worlds of their own making took the place of a spiritual community
at prayer and in service. A social agenda fell away, and so did the Bible and
traditional religious discourse, including a felt concern over sin or evil.29
The last chapter will take a closer look at this style of New Thought,
especially prominent in the twentieth century.
As the New Thought
movement grew and expanded, according to Materra, the
majority of the men embraced its noetic version, while the majority of the
women identified with the affective style. This division meant that-with so
many women in the overall movement-the noetic organizations generally attracted
equal or near-equal numbers of men and women, while affective networks were
strongly populated by women. Periodicals and monographs advanced the case for
each in almost a feeding frenzy of press activity as new literature came and
went, and new statements appeared, vanished, and were re-created in slightly
different guises. If New Thought put its premium on the word and its power,
divinely guided, to change earthly conditions and situations, it made good on
its commitment in the written, as well as the spoken, word. Periodicals
enhanced the national presence for groups like Mental Science and Unity, even
as the travels of Hopkins and her disciples on a burgeoning and efficient rail
system added to the nationwide spread of New Thought ideas and structures. By
1905 and the beginning of the middle years of the movement, New Thought could
be found in twenty-three states as well as in England, Mexico, and Australia.
The states with the greatest presence were New York, Massachusetts, Illinois,
California, and Colorado.30
As the movement grew
into these middle years, too, New Thought denominations came to flourish-some
like Unity, Religious Science, and Divine Science, to stay; and others, like
Annie Rix Militz's West Coast Homes of Truth and Wilmans's scattered Mental Science Temples, to disappear.
Ordinations were easy to come by, and-with the movement celebrating
diversity-decentralization was a major feature of organizational life. In fact,
the idea of establishing separate churches and denominations was quite foreign
to this late century-early century New Thought and, as in the case of the Unity
movement, was resisted throughout the twentieth century and on, even when all
the evidence belied the nondenominational declaration. The children of the one
God preferred, despite their obvious communitarian practices, to preserve
ideologies of seeking only the God within. Thus, as this sketch already
suggests, attempts to organize were fraught with difficulty. Finally, though,
by 1914, the International New Thought Alliance was formed. It had been
preceded by a series of meetings and organizational attempts, with the earliest
meeting that announced itself explicitly as a "New Thought
Convention" held in 1899 in Hartford, Connecticut. Thereafter, in Boston,
the International Metaphysical League called a convention, and organization -
and name changes - proceeded apace. Always, New Thought people aimed for
comprehensiveness, reaching out to embrace sympathizers in an erasure of
difference that was theological as well as social. Malinda Cramer's early
periodical Harmony spoke for all. Its cover page announced it to be "a
monthly magazine of philosophy, devoted to TRUTH, Science of Spirit, Theosophy,
Metaphysics, and to the Christ method of healing." But always, with the
individualism, New Thought ecumenical organizing was tenuous at best. Charles
and Myrtle Fillmore's Unity School of Christianity, for example, had only a
brief and tense time of inclusion in the International New Thought Alliance,
from 1919 until 1922, with Charles Fillmore for many years considering the
Unity movement "practical Christianity" and different from New Thought.31
The Reverend Solon
Lauer made the case for resemblance and inclusivity at a convention as early as
1889, explicitly naming spiritualism, Theosophy, and Christian Science and
declaring that there were "no very distinct lines of demarcation between
them." All of them, he thought, shared "certain things in
common," and he thought, too, that "perhaps a broad and generous
interpretation of each would remove most of the points of seeming
antagonism." What he said next was even more telling: "Certain it is
that there are thousands of persons who read the literature and attend the
public meetings of all of these movements, and who find much to love and admire
in them."32 We catch a glimpse of how this process worked in the personal
spiritual odyssey of Charles Fillmore (1854-1948). Even with his difficulties
with the International New Thought Alliance (suggesting more narrowness on his
part?), Fillmore's case is, in fact, representative. His years of religious
exploration illustrate how, in an expansive time and nation, the habit of
combination nudged Americans to forge out of the Hermetic and related legacies
of past and present the metaphysical synthesis of New Thought.
Born on a Chippewa
Indian reservation in northern Minnesota, Fillmore grew up in an Indian
territory in conflict, with Chippewa, Sioux, and whites all contesting for the
land. Besides being a farmer, his father worked as an Indian agent, and from
early on that fact must have translated into as much intimacy with Indian
culture as a white in a frontier locale could normally expect to acquire. Still
more, according to Fillmore's report, when he was six and alone with his mother
at the trading post his family operated, a roaming band of Sioux came and
spirited him away. The kidnapping did not last a day, for a few hours later the
child was returned unharmed. According to James Gaither, Fillmore later said
that he thought the Indians had used him for some sort ot
religious ceremony.33 How much the Indian haunting affected his later life is
difficult to determine, but the early contact with difference would be
replicated in the religious quest of his mature years, functioning perhaps as a
kind of horizon of spiritual possibility. At any rate, by 1889 and to beginning
years of the Unity movement, Fillmore could confide to readers of his new
journal Modem Thought that he had spent twenty years in the ranks of
"progressive Spiritualists." He thought that spiritualism had
"done a noble work in bringing light to the world," even as he
deplored the practice of the majority of contemporary adherents. "This
majority;' he complained, were "phenomenalists." Their
"tendency" was "to materialize the spirit world, instead of
spiritualizing the material world." Half of the mediums were "unconscious
subjects of some other mind." By contrast, metaphysics was "the
panacea for all such," because it taught the "soul" how it might
become a "spiritual center."34
Fillmore had gone
beyond spiritualism, but clearly he regarded spiritualists as metaphysical
cousins who had gotten things at least half right. Rather open in his
autobiographical reminiscences, by 1894 he was telling Thought readers that he
had been "born and raised in the wilderness of the west" and had
obtained only a "quite limited" religious education, with God an
"unknown factor" in his "conscious mind" until his last few
years. He added significantly, "I was always drawn to the mysterious and
occult, however, and in youth took great interest in Spiritualism and
afterward, in branches of the Hermetic philosophy." If so, Fillmore was
still trying to bring others to the Hermetic fold. As summarized by Braden,
advertisements for the first issue of Modem Thought included books and
periodicals displaying interest in "the occult, Spiritualism, theosophy,
Rosicrucianism, Hermeticism, and other subjects as well as in [generic]
Christian Science." Hermeticism likewise continued to influence Fillmore,
for his distinctive teaching on the "twelve powers of man" -based on
the notion that twelve seats of (spiritual) power exist throughout the human
body - was shaped by Rosicrucian ideas. In another example, the winged globe
that became Unity's symbol grew out of a Rosicrucian ambience, when Fillmore
responded to Freeman Benjamin Dowd's book The Temple of the Rosy Cross.35
Fillmore never officially
joined the Theosophical Society, and the names of neither he nor his wife,
Myrtle Fillmore, can be found on its membership rolls. Still, he observed in
one article that he had been "a very earnest student of Theosophy for
several years;' describing himself as "quite familiar with its
literature" within which he had found "much truth." He was also,
he said, "personally acquainted with several who are considered in the
inner circle of the Theosophical Society in America." He had "studied
them carefully, both from the exoteric and esoteric standpoints," and he
boasted, especially, of his "near friend," who was among "the
first members of the society in America" and "now right in the front
of the work." This man had studied Sanskrit for years, had the
"sacred writings of the Hindus" "at his tongue's end," and
had "developed quite remarkable occult powers." As in the case of the
switualists, Fillmore found the Theosophists half
right. They were "so loaded up with head learning" and they had so
made "of Karma a great Moloch" that they did not realize that by
"mental application" one could "wipe out ... present conditions
and make now a new environment."
Fillmore's
theosophical enthusiasm was apparent, as Neal Vahle
has noted, in the large number of reviews of books on Theosophy in the first
(1889) issue of Modem Thought-thirteen, among them Blavatsky's Isis
Unveiled-all of them recommended reading. Meanwhile, Fillmore, with
Theosophists, continued to embrace reincarnation beliefs (he once told Charles
Braden that he had been St. Paul in a previous life). Likewise, his connections
to Christian Science and its thought world were obvious, since he had been an
Emma Curtis Hopkins student and had brought her to Kansas City to teach several
classes.36 The largest difference between the Christian Science world of Eddy
and the New Thought one of Fillmore was the direction of their combinations.
Eddy combined Platonized Hermeticism and spiritualist-magnetic lingerings with Calvinism; Fillmore combined similar materials
with Christian liberalism and Theosophy instead of Calvinism.
Fillmore's comfort in
this blended and reconstructed world of differing metaphysical possibilities
was hardly remarkable. His articulateness and his outreach suggest what
numerous others in the metaphysical culture of the time were thinking,
experiencing, and doing. Especially to be noticed in all of this is how much
the comfort zone had extended to Asia. As Fillmore and so many Americans looked
eastward for spiritual inspiration and solace, however, what they found was
scarcely the unadulterated Asia of their (Romantic) vision. What they found,
instead, was the metaphysical Asia (mind, correspondences, energy, and healing
all there) that they had molded out of a Hermetic and vernacular magical past
and the pluralism of an American present. Meanwhile, as we will see, the Asia
of their discovery had also been mediated to them by the European West and an
East itself undergoing selective westernization.
1. See Gill, Mary
Baker Eddy, 158-59, 312. For accounts of the early growth of New Thought in the
environs of Boston, see Judah, History and Philosophy of the Metaphysical
Movements, 169-93; and Braden, Spirits in Rebellion, 129-54.
2. Horatio W.
Dresser, A History of the New Thought Movement (New York: T. Y. Crowell, 1919);
Julius A. Dresser, The True History of Mental Science: A Lecture Delivered at
the Church of the Divine Unity, rev. with additions (Boston: Alfred Budge,
1887); Judah, History and Philosophy of the Metaphysical Movements, 170; M[athilda]. J. Barnett, Practical Metaphysics; or, The True
Method of Healing (Boston: H. H. Carter and Karrick,
1887); W[illiam]. J. Colville, The Spiritual Science
of Health and Healing: Considered in Twelve Lectures, Delivered
Inspirationally, by W. J. Colville, in San Francisco and Boston, during 1886
(Chicago: Garden City Publishing, 1887).
3. Braden, Spirits in
Rebellion, 149; Materra, "Women in Early New
Thought," 80, 88,90.
4. Satter, Each Mind a Kingdom, 79-80; J. Gordon Melton,
"Emma Curtis Hopkins: A Feminist of the 1880s and Mother of New
Thought," in Catherine Wessinger, ed., Women's
Leadership in Marginal Religions Explorations Outside the Mainstream (Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1993), 88-101; Gail M. Harley, Emma Curtis
Hopkins: Forgotten Founder of New Thought (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University
Press, 2002); Braden, Spirits in Rebellion, 143.
5. Useful
constructions of Hopkins's life may be found in Harley, Emma Curtis Hopkins;
Melton, "Emma Curtis Hopkins," 88-101; and Materra,
"Women in Early New Thought," 131-44.
6. Satter, Each Mind a Kingdom, 81-82; Emma Curtis Hopkins,
"Teachers of Metaphysics;' Christian Science Journal (September 1885), in
J. Gordon Melton, ed., New Thought: A Reader (Santa Barbara, Calif.: Institute
for the Study of American Religion, 1990), 90; Harley, Emma Curtis Hopkins,
18-20; Robert Peel, Mary Baker Eddy: The Years of Trial (New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, 1971), 179-80.
7. Materra, "Women in Early New Thought," 136-37.
8. As quoted ibid.,
140.
9. "Kansas City
College of Christian Science," Christian Science Thought 2, no. 1 (April
1890): 13.
10. Harley, Emma
Curtis Hopkins, 35-129.
11. Satter, Each Mind a Kingdom, 86-89. Satter
read Evans only in terms of his final book Esoteric Christianity and Mental
Therapeutics; Schoepflin, Christian Science on Trial,
91-92. Hopkins, as an Eddy Scientist, accused A. J. Swarts of plagiarism (from
Eddy) but later mended fences with him when she moved to Chicago, and she even,
for a time, edited his journal. On the spiritualism of the Swartses,
see Braude, Radical Spirits, 185-86.
12. Emma Curtis
Hopkins, High Mysticism: A Series of Twelve Studies in the Wisdom of the Sages
of the Ages (1924?; rpt., Marina del Rey, Calif.: DeVorss,
[1974]); Aldous Huxley, The Perennial Philosophy (New York: Harper, 1945). The
publishing history of High Mysticism (or Higher Mysticism, which may have been
its original title) is tangled at best. Internal evidence points to 1917 or
thereafter as the date of composition (see Hopkins, High Mysticism, 133), but
the earliest listed edition I can locateCornwall
Bridge, Conn.: High Watch Fellowship, 1914-1925 -predates the 1917 year. The
on-line catalog of the University of California also lists two 1924 editions:
New York: E. S. Gorham, 1924; and Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1924. This
last lists its title as Studies in High Mysticism: The Magia
Jesu Christi, IV Faith, a title important because it suggests that, as Charles
Braden categorically stated (Spirits in Rebellion, 148), the twelve studies
were originally published independently and in different years (supported by
the inclusive dates of the High Watch Fellowship listing), thus explaining the
1917 reference and the 1914 first publication date. Note, too, in this last
title the evocation of Jesus as "Magia,"
pointing to the Hermetic and theosophical influence on the work.
13. Emma Curtis
Hopkins, "God's Omnipresence;' Journal of Christian Science (April 1884),
in Melton, ed., New Thought, 86; Emma Curtis Hopkins, "Fiat Justitia;'
Journal of Christian Science (November 1884), in Melton, ed., New Thought, 88.
14. Harley, Emma
Curtis Hopkins, 82-83; Melton, "Emma Curtis Hopkins;' 93-95; Emma Curtis Hopkins;wThe Ministry of the Holy Mother (Cornwall Bridge,
Conn.: Emma Curtis Hopkins Fund, n.d.).
15. See Harley, Emma
Curtis Hopkins, 11-13.
16. Emma (Curtis)
Hopkins, "C. S. Ordination Address;' Christian Science 1, no. 7 (March 1889):
173-75. I have counted at least five Hopkins ordination addresses, very similar
in content, in Ida Nichols's Chicago-based Christian Science journal. Besides
this first one, they include: Emma (Curtis) Hopkins, "c. S. Ordination
Address;' Christian Science 1, no. 10 (June 1889): 269-74; Emma Curtis Hopkins,
"Ordination Address;' Christian Science 2, no. 11 (July 1890): 342-46;
Emma Curtis Hopkins, "Ordination Address;' Christian Science 3, no. 5
(January 1891): 131-36; and Emma Curtis Hopkins, "Ordination
Address," Christian Science 4, no. 2 (October 1891): 34- 39.
17. Emma Curtis
Hopkins, "How to Attain Your Good (n.d.)," in Melton, ed., New
Thought, 96-100 (emphases in Melton), 103-4.
18. Emma Curtis
Hopkins, Scientific Christian Mental Practice (1958; rpt., Marina del Rey,
Calif.: DeVorss, n.d.), 62-63 (upper case in
original), 73, 90 (emphasis in original), 94,93,251. There is evidence that
individual chapters were first published separately.
19. Hopkins, High
Mysticism, 33,43,32,108 (on separate publication of the chapters, see n141).
20. Satter, Each Mind a Kingdom, esp. 13-14.
21. Materra, "Women in Early New Thought;' 300, 302, 9-10,
12,47, passim.
22. See ibid.,
203-32, where Materra cites and quotes these cases.
23. See ibid.,
232-34, where Materra cites and quotes these cases.
24. See Satter, Each Mind a Kingdom, 200-205; Edward Bellamy,
Looking Backward, 2000-1887 (Boston: Ticknor, 1888).
25. Ralph Waldo
Trine, In Tune with the Infinite; or, Fullness of Peace, Power, and Plenty (New
York: Crowell, 1897); Materra, "Women in Early
New Thought;' 240, 239, 24142,236-38.
26. Donald Meyer, The
Positive Thinkers: A Study of the American Quest for Health, Wealth, and
Personal Power from Mary Baker Eddy to Norman Vincent Peale (1965), 2d ed. as
The Positive Thinkers: Religion as Pop Psychology from Mary Baker Eddy to Oral
Roberts (New York: Pantheon, 1980).
27. Materra, "Women in Early New Thought;' 101-2.
28. [Charles
Fillmore], "Not an Answer, but an Opportunity," Thought 5, no. 11
(February 1894): 454, 454-60 (emphases in original); Materra,
"Women in Early New Thought;' 291, 299-301, passim.
29. See Materra, "Women in Early New Thought;' esp. 302, 106.
30. See Braden,
Spirits in Rebellion, 323 (upper case in Braden), 259-61; Judah, History and
Philosophy of the Metaphysical Movements, 240-41.
31. Rev. Solon Lauer,
''After Christianity, What?" (1889), as quoted in Judah, History and
Philosophy of the Metaphysical Movements, 178.
32. Neal Vahle, The Unity Movement: Its Evolution and Spiritual
Teachings (Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation, 2002), 33; James Gaither, ed.,
The Essential Charles Fillmore: Collected Writings of a Missounystic
(Unity Village, Mo.: Unity, 1999), 8. Vahle bases his
account on an unidentified New York City newspaper article from 1934 entitled
"Unity Founder Tells What It Means” (Charles Fillmore Collection, Unity
Archives).
33. [Charles
Fillmore], "Spiritualism and Metaphysics," Modern Thought 1, no. 5
(August 1889): 8 (emphasis in original).
34. [Fillmore],
"Not an Answer but an Opportunity;' 456-57; Judah, History and Philosophy
of the Metaphysical Movements, 248, 235; Braden, Spirits in Rebellion, 33233;
Charles Fillmore, The Twelve Powers of Man (Kansas City, Mo.: Unity School of
Christianity, 1930); Freeman Benjamin Dowd, The Temple of the Rosy Cross: The
Soul, Its Powers, Migrations, and Transmigrations (San Francisco: Rosy Cross,
1888).
35. Leo-Virgo
[Charles Fillmore], '''Let Your Light Shine,'" Thought 4, no. 9 (December
1892): 358-59 (emphasis in original); Vahle, Unity
Movement, 137. On Fillmore's reincarnation beliefs, see Vahle,
Unity Movement, 63-67, 70; Gaither, ed., Essential Charles Fillmore, 387-93;
Braden, Spirits in Rebellion, 260. For Emma Curtis Hopkins's classes in Kansas
City, Missouri, see "Mrs. Hopkins' Primary Class in Kansas City;' Modem
Thought 1, no. 9 (January 1890): 8; "Personal," Modem Thought 1, no.
11 (March 1890): 8; "Kansas City College of Christian Science,"
Christian Science Thought 2, no. 1 (April 1890): 13; "The Theological Class
in Christian Science," Christian Science Thought 2, no. 3 (May 1890): 9.
Diane Smith of Membership Services at the Theosophical Society in America,
after on-line and microfiche research in the society's records at Wheaton,
Illinois, found membership for only two persons named Fillmore- both in the San
Antonio, Texas, lodge and only from February 1920 through June 1921. Neither
Cap. Harston D. Fillmore, M.D., nor his wife, Annie A. Fillmore, have any known
relationship to Charles and Myrtle Fillmore.
For updates
click homepage here