University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2018-08-14 What Makes a Founder? : Determining the Founder of New Thought Shopf, Kevin Shopf, K. (2018). What Makes a Founder? : Determining the Founder of New Thought (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/32815 http://hdl.handle.net/1880/107635 master thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY What Makes a Founder? : Determining the Founder of New Thought by Kevin Shopf A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS GRADUATE PROGRAM IN RELIGIOUS STUDIES CALGARY, ALBERTA AUGUST, 2018 © Kevin Shopf 2018 i Abstract This thesis both rekindles the debate over the title of “founder” of New Thought and presents a definitive statement on who should be considered the “founder.” In this debate, the long-standing and most accepted “founder” is Phineas Parkhurst Quimby. Phineas Quimby was a mental healer who is credited with inspiring many important figures in metaphysical movements in America including Mary Baker Eddy, Warren Felt Evans and Julius and Annetta Dresser. In various histories on New Thought, Quimby is regarded as the intellectual founder for the movement. However, this view of Quimby is the product of later developments in the New Thought movement that required an intellectual founder to validate its status over Christian Science. This thesis builds upon more recent suggestions and argues that Emma Curtis Hopkins is the organizational and theological founder of New Thought. Hopkins’ role in the structural development of the New Thought religion and its major branches has been recognized in titles such as “teacher’s teacher” and “Mother of New Thought.” Hopkins, through her extensive teaching activities and the foundation of the Emma Curtis Hopkins College of Christian Science, influenced several significant figures in New Thought including Charles and Myrtle Fillmore, the founders of Unity; Ernest Holmes, the founder of Religious Science; Annie Rix Militz, the founder of Homes of Truth; and Malinda Cramer and the Brooks sisters, the founders of Divine Science. These activities establish her status as the organizational founder of New Thought. However, Hopkins’ theological contributions to the formation of New Thought have been unduly minimized due to the shadow of Quimby and the lack of recognition of her distinctive ii intellectual contributions. This thesis validates Hopkins’ contributions to New Thought theology, especially in reference to its construction as a religion and some of its distinctive ideas. iii This thesis is original, unpublished, independent work by the author, Kevin Shopf. iv Table of Contents Abstract ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ i Table of Contents ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ iv Chapter 1 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 1 Chapter 2 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 7 Chapter 3 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 39 Chapter 4 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 66 Chapter 5 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 87 Bibliography ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 97 1 Chapter 1 In the mid-1800s Americans were exploring new concepts of philosophical and religious thinking. Spurred on by societal changes brought about by the Industrial Revolution and inspired by similar movements in Europe and a growing awareness of Eastern beliefs and ideas, a series of new religious movements began to appear. Many of these movements focused on a greater awareness and involvement of mental faculties. As Catherine L. Albanese wrote in A Republic of Mind and Spirit, “metaphysical forms of religion have privileged the mind in forms that include reason but move beyond it to intuition, clairvoyance, and its relatives such as ‘revelation’ and ‘higher guidance’.”1 These metaphysical movements all put emphasis on the power and ability of the mind, in some degree, to shape and influence reality. Various groups are included in this category such as Spiritualism, Theosophy, Christian idealism, New England Transcendentalism, and Mesmerism. To varying degrees these groups may all be considered a part of, or at the least related to, the family of metaphysical religions. The two mainstays of this family, as well as the ones from which the name is first derived, are New Thought and Christian Science. It is these two movements that best exemplify the principles of the metaphysical movements, particularly the power of the mind and its influence on reality. It is important to note that the term metaphysical in this instance is not a reference to metaphysics in the philosophical sense; instead, it is a term referencing these religious groups’ emphasis on the mental over the material, or physical. This is an insider term that was popularly used and subsequently adopted by scholars as a convenient and useful classification indicating the similarities between these groups and how they differ from other religious traditions.2 These metaphysical religions are idealistic 1 Catherine Albanese, A Republic of Mind and Spirit (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007), 6. 2 Horatio Dresser, A History of the New Thought Movement (New York, NY: T. Y. Crowell, 1919), 141-142; Braden, Spirits in Rebellion, 4. 2 groups that to varying degrees believe in the primacy of the mental over the material.3 Christian Science is the most entrenched in the idealism of the movements since Christian Science rejects the material world as reality, instead believing it to be an illusion created by the mind. New Thought does not fully reject the material world; but it holds that the mind has primacy and control over the material. New Thought, in contrast to Christian Science, has had rather sparse attention given to it throughout its history. Unlike Christian Science, New Thought has remained largely free from public controversy and thus garnered much less attention than Christian Science. What controversy and debate has occurred in regard to New Thought is, in some way, related to Mary Baker Eddy. For instance, Charles Braden’s Spirits in Rebellion, which is considered the official history of New Thought, spends a significant amount of time addressing Eddy and her relation to New Thought. The close relation between Eddy, controversy, and the history of New Thought is a topic that will be explored more fully in later chapters. Following Braden there was a dearth of scholarly work on New Thought for a number of years. In the late 1980s academic attention into New Thought grew, notably with the founding of the Society for the Study of Metaphysical Religions.4 The 2002 publication of Gail Harley’s Emma Curtis Hopkins: Forgotten Founder of New Thought represents a new phase in the study of New Thought. Harley’s book serves as an excellent biography of Emma Curtis Hopkins as well as the starting point of the Hopkins as New Thought’s founder debate. For most of New Thought’s history, Hopkins has been a largely overlooked figure. While scholars such as Braden recognized that Hopkins was important to New Thought, mainly through acknowledging her 3 Idealistic here refers to the philosophical concept that reality is fundamentally mental in nature. 4 While no longer functioning, the Society for the Study of Metaphysical Religions and their regularly published journal were a major source of scholarly work on metaphysical religions, especially New Thought. 3 epithet “teacher’s teacher,”5 this recognition was limited to no more than a mere acknowledgement. Hopkins was treated like a footnote in New Thought’s history rather than an important figure. Harley changed this by compiling as much biographical information on Hopkins as she was able, providing a more complete view and analysis of Hopkins and her contributions to New Thought than had previously been seen. Research into the history of New Though has not only been limited; but biased. The majority of scholarship in regard to New Thought has been from an emic perspective.6 Those scholars interested in New Thought in its early years, such as Horatio Dresser, were interested precisely because they were part of the movement.7 Consequently, most of the foundational works of New Thought are from emic perspectives and those works that have built off of this foundation have tended to be influenced by these emic perspectives. This is best seen in Charles Braden’s Spirits in Rebellion. Braden’s