Currently, sitting at my brother’s
lake house three days after having listened to Dr. Tom’s radio show and reading
“How to Let God Help you”… I am still contemplating Myrtle’s concept of
God. I thought it would be easier to understand, digest and pick apart her
ideologies if I just sat with it for a while.
To be honest, it is very difficult to make assumptions and judgments about
Myrtle’s concept of God. I say it is
difficult because it would seem Myrtle’s concept of God could be interpreted in
many ways. Myrtle was a Victorian woman
who attended a liberal college. She was
a progressive woman with her own ideas. One
of the first thing’s told to us in “How
to let God help you” is that “God is the very intelligence within us.”(p.12)
Myrtle did not believe that a God existed outside of herself. The belief that there was a God outside of
oneself tended to be a traditionally accepted point of view for this period of
time. Myrtle was probably anything but traditional.
In chapter three I ran across this quote,
which expands on the partial quote found in chapter one. “The very presence, life, and intelligence of
God are ever abiding in man’s being. The
Spirit of God is what gives you intelligence and life.”(p. 22) Myrtle is not
proclaiming that only she herself has a personal relationship with God she is
saying we all have the ability to have a personal relationship with God,
because God dwells within us. It is up to us to choose God who is a part of us,
and active in us to do the work we were put her to do.
When I think of Myrtle’s concept of
God I envision God flowing just like a faucet does. The water is always there and available to
us. The water has to be accessed by us.
We have to turn the water on.
Once the water is turned on all our senses could be engaged with the flowing
water. We have the ability to hear the
water, see the water, taste it, bathe in it, or turn it off again. Myrtle’s concept of God is just like
this. Our water source is always
available and waiting to be accessed. In
essence, the same way God is always available to Myrtle.
In this writer’s opinion I don’t
see Myrtle as pantheist because she believed in a personal and all encompassing
God. Myrtle had a relationship with God,
a God she recognized as dwelling in her.
Panentheism seems to fit some of Myrtle’s beliefs of an all-encompassing
God when she speaks so eloquently about nature and its relationship with all. Myrtle believed that God is a part of all
things of and in the universe, which seems to fit very well with the definition
of Panentheism. I recognize as I make
this statement that other schools of thought had not been fully developed at a
time when Myrtle’s spiritual faculties were unfolding and therefore she
developed idea’s of God that worked for her.
In thinking about Myrtle as a monist,
it would seem this is very possible. Myrtle could have believed herself to be a
monist. The idea that God did not create
humanity but expresses itself as humanity is an interesting concept to
consider. What a great question to ask
her someday…
I can picture you on the lake enjoying your family and this time of year. It must ve a much better view than this very small window space we have to type a response in to a blog:)))
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting if you look at our class responses to this reading. So members of our class see Myrtle's theology pointing only to a God without. Others-- like you-- seem to see Myrtle only believing only in a God within. Yet others in our class view Myrtle pointing to a God that is both without and within at the same time.
Given all of these different responses, it makes one wonder if we were all reading the same chapters written by the same person:))) Yes, we all have a different lens on when reading these chapters. But this is a real big difference. I am use to economics where if you read, say, Milton Friedman, everyone in the class might have a somewhat different take on Friedman. But we could at least all agree that Friedman did not have a high opinion of an activist government using fiscal policy to "fine tune" the economy.
In this case, our class can't reach a similar consensus. Could it be that Myrtle-- unlike Milton Friedman-- was not clear on certain central issues? Or could it be that theology is a much more complex and paradoxical subject area than the 'dismal science'?
You use the image of turning on a water faucet. The question that still seems to be up in the air -- concerning Myrtle's theology-- is: Where does the spiritual water come from?
Have a great time on the lake.
Quoting Mrs. Fillmore, you wrote: "The Spirit of God is what gives you intelligence and life.." and found this provides clear that, "Myrtle did not believe that a God existed outside of herself." Yet, if something “gives you intelligence and life,” doesn’t that mean an external Power has done something to the individual? Your sweeping assertion that Myrtle disbelieved in God beyond herself becomes problematic when looking at her repeated use of Creator-God and Father-God language in describing the Divine. Could the places where she speaks of God-within better be understood as metaphors of Divine Omnipresent rather than statements about the exclusivity of an Indwelling Lord?
ReplyDeleteIf you want to establish Myrtle as a monist rather than a monotheist, you’ll need better evidence. As Richard has suggested, perhaps her writing can be read as dualistic, monotheistic, AND monistic. Is it possible to hold those views at the same time without flagrant contradiction, or was theological consistency unimportant to her? If the latter, why? And what does this mean for the methodology employed in Unity today?
Dig deeper. There must be gold in this mine somewhere…
Christine- Hope you’re feeling renewed and refreshed at the lake house. I’m having a hard time staying intellectual and watching surfer dudes take on the Pacific Ocean. Myrtle reveled in the omnipresence of God while she was surrounded by nature. I’m pretty sure she wasn't worried about her theological consistency in that experience. Could that we why we’re all over the place trying to pin her down? To Myrtle God was everything and MORE because God had intention. Whatever we call it--Divine Mind or something else, Myrtle understood that God had a direction to creation and that it was exclusively for good, not evil or to harm. That being said, the metaphor you use about the flowing water always available reminds me of Emilie Cady’s “fountain.” I see no dualism in either of them. I agree; if we pinned her down, she might say she was a monist. But if we really challenged her, I think she’d recant, admitting she was a panentheist all along.
ReplyDeleteChristine - perhaps the water theme was so prevalent since you were at the lake house! The analogy is a good one, I think, to describe and summarize Myrtle's description of God. Thanks for joining us from the lake!
ReplyDeleteHi Christine,
ReplyDeleteI love that quote you found, "God is the very intelligence within us.” However, it would seem to imply that "we" exist separately from God as some kind of inert thing and that God (as intelligence) flows through us and turns the inert thing into a "live, intelligent" thing. Now for me, the question is, is that what she really thought? I still don't know!
I agree with Daybree. Your analogy of God flowing like a faucet is a good one. We know that all we have to do is turn on the faucet when we want water. However, while we know that God is available and easily accessible, we tend to limit our use of the "faucet" to when we are in dire need of its life saving properties.
ReplyDelete