Author: J Douglas Bottorff

Doug is minister of Independent Unity, author of 8 books, musician and photography enthusiast. He lives with his wife and cat in western Colorado.

The Fillmorian Influence

[Note: I have little doubt that few of you who may take the time to read this post in its entirety will care much about it. It is chapter 2 of my book, The Complete Soul. Why do I say this? If you were not drawn into the Unity movement through the teachings of its co-founder, Charles Fillmore, you’ll probably find it confusing. If you were drawn into Unity through the Fillmorian teachings, you’ll probably find it borderline sacrilegious. It wasn’t intended to be either. With all due respect to Mr. Fillmore, I intended to address what I believe is a significant misunderstanding of the nature of the soul.

It’s a long piece, so take it in small bits. JDB]

Chapter 2

The Fillmorian Influence

And when he entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came up to him as he was teaching, and said, “By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?”[1]

Though my first exposure to Unity was through the writings of Emilie Cady, I would discover later that she wrote as a representative of the Unity Movement, co-founded by Charles and Myrtle Fillmore. Prior to this discovery, I had no knowledge of Unity as an organization.

Cady’s book, Lessons in Truth, first appeared as a series of articles in Unity. This series was the Fillmore’s response to a Unity subscriber’s request to “…have one of your clearest writers, one who understands the principles, and the uninformed mind of a student, write an explanation of this grand Truth in very simple form and in simple, clear words.” As a regular contributor to a number of Unity publications, the Fillmores selected Cady for the task. In my opinion, her work still represents the gold standard of presentations of Unity’s core teachings.

In the meantime, Fillmore continued developing his own writing skills, and deepening his understanding of spiritual principles. In much the same way science has been on a quest for the theory of everything (a single theory linking all aspects of the material universe), so Fillmore was in search of a spiritual key for resolving the full range of human problems. Having explored many of the world’s religious and occult teachings, he narrowed his search to the example and teachings of Jesus Christ. There he found his theory of everything, his universal key that, in his view, held the promise of ending all human suffering. This key was his concept of regeneration, which he defined as:

“A change in which abundant spiritual life, even eternal life, is incorporated into the body. The transformation that takes place through bringing all the forces of mind and body to the support of the Christ ideal. The unification of Spirit, soul, and body in spiritual oneness.”[2]

Once it solidified in his own thinking, this concept provided the logic that inspired Fillmore’s elaborate vision of humankind’s ultimate goal, a snapshot of which we find in the opening paragraph of his book, The Twelve Powers of Man:

“Jesus prophesied the advent of a race of men who would sit with Him on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. This book explains the meaning of this mystical reference, what and where the twelve thrones are, and what attainments are necessary by man before he can follow Jesus in this phase of his regeneration. Regeneration follows generation in the development of man. Generation sustains and perpetuates the human; regeneration unfolds and glorifies the divine.”[3]

The scriptural support for this lofty vision comes from the King James Version (KJV) of the Gospel of Matthew. Jesus and his disciples are in conversation, with the disciples expressing their concern of having given up everything to follow Jesus. What rewards await them?

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.[4]

Given the fact that he makes this text and the concept of regeneration the central theme of his teaching, his theory of everything, scholars today would find Fillmore’s interpretation of the above scripture problematic. In the entire Bible, there are but two occurrences of the word, regeneration (Matthew 19:28, Titus 3:5). As we’ve seen, the Matthew reference appears only in the KJV.[5] Modern translations drop regeneration from Matthew, favoring instead phrases like “in the new world”[6] and “at the renewal of all things.”[7]

That the followers of the Jesus movement would have seen this passage as a mystical reference to body and soul regeneration is doubtful. Every aspect of the Bible is, of course, fair game for metaphysical interpretation, but Matthew’s passage obviously points to the literal second coming, the ushering in of the new age,[8] and the rewards for those who have sacrificed everything for their faith.

“And every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life.”[9]

As one trained in the foundation principles of Unity, I attribute my early understanding of the soul as an evolving entity to Charles Fillmore. Though Cady certainly implied it, she was far less energetic in her discourse on the particulars of the subject. We will see in the remainder of this chapter that Fillmore presented Jesus as the sole example of the highly evolved, spiritually unified, completely regenerated human being. Based on my respect for Fillmorian authority, this is the view I endorsed before I had the confidence to draw my own conclusions. Presenting the reasons why I have now come to a different understanding of the soul and of Jesus and his role is the subject of this chapter and the one that follows.

From the writers of the New Testament to now, all generations of Christian leaders have utilized the words and actions of Jesus to lend authority and credibility to the advancement of their organizational causes and personal agendas. There was much tension between Paul and his appeal to embrace the Gentiles, and those who sought to limit passing the message of Jesus exclusively to the Jewish community. Using Jesus and his messianic credentials as their authority, each side accused the other of preaching a false gospel.

Some years ago, a couple asked me to perform a wedding in a well-known chapel in the foothills near Denver. When the Evangelical Christian owners of the chapel learned that I was a Unity minister, they barred me from performing the ceremony. They said Unity was “theologically impure” and, therefore, non-Christian.

It was attitudes like these that I believe motivated Fillmore to go to extreme lengths to not only prove Unity was theologically pure, but to show it was the purest and truest representation of the Christian message. “We believe all the doctrines of Christianity spiritually interpreted”[10] He applied his interpretation of Jesus, a mighty, larger-than-life, fully regenerated type-man, very much alive and standing at the head of the Unity movement, as the primary means of advancing his system of thought. He insisted that long established ideas about Jesus did not go far enough, that Jesus was all they said and so much more. He was the ultimate Wayshower of the human race, the great example of what the fully regenerated human being was to look like.

This portrayal, like those of his more traditional counterparts, set an idealized standard of spiritual and physical accomplishment that, in my observation, has driven some, including Fillmore himself, to obsess over unrealistic expectations of the body. In an article written in 1920 he wrote,

“The Spirit showed me several years ago that I must quit having my picture taken; that I must quit looking into the mirror and seeing myself as a murky imagination had formed me. I had within me the concept of a fine looking young man, but when I looked into the glass, or when I had my picture taken, he did not appear. And other people did not see him and they began to impress me with error both within and without.”[11]

Though the legends persist that Fillmore, through vigorous affirmative prayer work, did manage to regain some of his youthful appearance, an outside observer saw him at age 84 as a “white-haired man” bearing the same failing physical and mental characteristics typical of that age. According to Myrtle, he became reluctant to appear in public “until he has completed his demonstration of healing his leg,”[12] the result of a childhood injury that plagued him his entire life. Showing any signs of age or illness would have run counter to his declaration that the human being was capable of living in the body forever. Asked if he expected to live forever in his body, Fillmore responded in this way:

“This question is often asked by Unity readers. Some of them seem to think that I am either a fanatic or a joker if I take myself seriously in the hope that I shall with Jesus attain eternal life in the body. But the fact is that I am very serious about the matter.”[13]

Though he did not succeed, there is no doubt that he was committed to the idea. The force with which he advanced his ideal influenced many Unity followers to adopt this type-man he saw in Jesus as the Holy Grail of spiritual attainment. One woman I knew, steeped in Fillmore’s denial of old age, was adamant about not speaking her age, believing that acknowledging it would make it so. I am certain that any stranger meeting her at any point in her life would have been able to guess her age based on her bodily appearance. To many who knew her, including myself, this all seemed an overly dramatic game.

I support much of what Charles Fillmore taught and I encourage all to read the full body of his works. But I have never been able to accept his ideas on the potential for physical immortality, or that Jesus pioneered and advocated eternal life in the physical body. My sense is that Fillmore’s life-long struggle with his own physical condition is the thing that made soul and body regeneration his personal focus.

Soul Evolution and Reincarnation

This glorified portrayal of Jesus, put forward as our ultimate example of spiritual achievement, has forced us to accept that the soul of the average person, far from hitting this extraordinarily high mark, must be evolving toward the perfection of Christ Consciousness. Fillmore taught that all people could eventually reach this level, making it necessary to include the concepts of soul evolution and reincarnation as bridging mechanisms needed to carry out this lofty achievement.

He was not alone in adopting soul evolution as the means of facilitating the individual’s march toward spiritual perfection, but Fillmore was especially emphatic in tying soul development directly to the condition of the physical body. He saw the body as “the highest-formed manifestation of creative Mind, and that it is capable of unlimited expression of that Mind.” As we have seen, this unlimited expression would ultimately translate into physical immortality.

“When man realizes that there is but one body-idea and that the conditions in his body express the character of his thought, he has the key to bodily perfection and immortality in the flesh.”[14]

The body, according to Fillmore, projects the condition of the soul. The degeneration of the body, through aging and death, indicates the soul has not yet evolved to full alignment with the Christ ideal that rests in the mind of God.

“If you believe in old age and bodily decrepitude and decay, you will find that all the little cells throughout your organism are carrying in their depths just such pictures, as the clear waters of the lake reflect the trees and the clouds.”[15]

The body, then, is a kind of barometer that reflects the state of the soul. The aging process and any separation of spirit, soul, and body brought on by physical death are due to a “transgression of the divine law.”[16] According to this view, the soul contains many ideas that are not in alignment with what is true of Spirit. Because Fillmore believed the “soul makes the body,” the body displays, in the form of disease and death, the untruths held at the soul level. The remedy is to regenerate the soul, bringing its sum of ideas up to the standard of the I Am, the support of the Christ ideal. In the meantime, the soul is in a constant state of evolving from a mortal to an immortal condition, which the body follows.

As I’ve pointed out, this evolution of soul and body takes place through multiple incarnations. This belief, perhaps inadvertently, elevates reincarnation to the status of an evolutionary requirement or, as Fillmore calls it:

“… a merciful provision of our loving Father to the end that all may have opportunity to attain immortality through regeneration, as did Jesus.”[17]

In other words, Fillmore does not present reincarnation as a choice-based option, but instead makes it an evolutionary inevitability, a required link in his chain of logic. In addition to merciful, we are compelled to accept reincarnation as a necessary provision of our soul’s continued progress, and we are forced to measure this progress by the present condition of our physical body.

I believe it is an unnecessary burden to think the body and its present condition represent the condition of the soul. According to this association, if the body is expressing disease and limitation of any kind, it is because a similar condition exists in the soul. This problem is the result of considering the terms soul and consciousness as having the same meaning. We’ll take an in-depth, alternative look at the terms, soul, consciousness, and self-image in Chapter 4.

The health of our body, or the lack thereof, does indeed have a direct relation to the instabilities and stresses brought on by our consciousness. This is very different from suggesting the soul is flawed and these flaws are out-picturing in the body. The beliefs generated by the self-image act as a kind of weather system containing clouds that mask the sunlight of the soul. The soul’s radiance is perpetual, but the self-image produces a cloud cover of fear and stress that has a negative impact on our mental and physical well-being. We know that a person can display a perfectly healthy body and remain spiritually asleep. Likewise, one can be spiritually awake and still be afflicted with a physical malady or handicap.

Jesus and Soul Evolution

We can trace the association of soul evolution and reincarnation far back into the history of Eastern religions. The idea of the soul being reborn in another body as a further chance to attain higher consciousness, or to work out one’s karma, is a central tenet. Fillmore put a Christianized spin on this process by declaring Jesus the only person who had ever lifted his physical body to this fully regenerated condition. Through “conscious union with Jesus in the regeneration,” he wrote, each person could “transform his body and make it perpetually healthy, therefore immortal, and that he can attain eternal life in this way and in no other way.”[18] Jesus “was the ‘first-fruits’ of those who are coming out of the mortal into the immortal.” According to the logic of these statements, one not only had to be Christian to gain eternal life, he or she had to be a metaphysical Christian.

This view of reincarnation explains why, with the exception of the ascended Jesus, we see no fully regenerated humans roaming planet earth.

“He [Jesus] was the type man, the Way-Shower, and, through following His example and taking on His character as a spiritual-minded man, we shall come into the same consciousness.”[19]

To Fillmore, physical death, which he described as the “terror of humanity,” represents a complete breakdown in adherence to the law of regeneration.

At the point of physical death, Fillmore envisioned the soul entering a kind of sleep in which neither learning nor advancement of any kind can occur. It is with the next physical incarnation that the soul resumes its evolutionary journey from where it left off in the previous incarnation.

“As death has no power to help anyone, the condition of the Adam man is not bettered by dying. Therefore, when people are re-embodied they ‘come forth . . . unto the resurrection of damnation,’ in other words, condemnation or correction. Everyone begins where he left off.”[20]

This assertion clearly runs counter to the findings of researchers in the field of near-death studies, research that was unavailable in Fillmore’s time. Far from slipping into sleep or a coma, the majority of near-death experiencers report that they feel more alive than ever. A substantial number report tapping a universal wisdom and love beyond anything they can describe. They often see through the shallow interests and cares of their worldly pursuits. It is common for those devoted to chasing materialistic ends to lift their standards and aim for higher purposes. Atheists return believing in God. Religious believers have their minds opened far beyond the dogmatic parameters of their training. Virtually none of them “begins where he left off,” even when their episodes last but a few minutes. As researchers have discovered, the near-death experience often changes people to their core, and in moments. This is a sharp contrast to the view expressed by Fillmore:

“Awakening cannot be associated with dying. The idea that man awakens to spiritual or any kind of consciousness immediately after “death,” whether in heaven, hell, purgatory, or elsewhere, is opposed to Truth. His awakening must take place here, during the time of “life,” at least while he is partially awake and before he sinks into that deeper sleep or coma that we call death.”[21]

Viewing physical death as he did, can we wonder that Fillmore failed to see any kind of spiritual value associated with the loss of the body? The evidence is now overwhelming that so-called death is neither a deeper sleep nor a coma, but a state of enhanced lucidity. In this state, the individual is more alive and alert, their ability to see, hear, and know more acute than at any time while in the body. In light of what we are learning from this research, the argument can and should be made that overcoming death has less to do with physical immortality and more to do with the revelation that there is, in fact, no death. “Death,” as one NDEr concluded, “is a really nasty lie.”

Carl Jung Testimony

There are some who pass off near-death research as merely anecdotal and, therefore, inconsequential and unreliable. The experiencer, they might say, is predisposed to a certain kind of imagery due to their beliefs. This may be true to some extent, but we cannot ignore the fact that there are common elements found in the overwhelming majority of cases from all cultures and demographics. Nor can we ignore the testimony of individuals we consider highly credible, especially when they gave it prior to the popularization of near-death studies.

One notable case is that of Swiss psychiatrist, Carl Jung. After having a heart attack accompanied by an NDE, he wrote:

“I would never have imagined that any such experience was possible. It was not a product of imagination. The visions and experiences were utterly real; there was nothing subjective about them; they all had a quality of absolute objectivity.”[22]

So real was this experience that Jung, like many before and after him, was quite reluctant to return to the confines of his physical body.

“In reality, a good three weeks were still to pass before I could truly make up my mind to live again. I could not eat because all food repelled me. The view of city and mountains from my sickbed seemed to me like a painted curtain with black holes in it, or a tattered sheet of newspaper full of photographs that meant nothing. Disappointed, I thought: “Now I must return to ‘the box system’ again.” For it seemed to me as if behind the horizon of the cosmos a three-dimensional world had been artificially built up, in which each person sat by himself in a little box. And now I should have to convince myself all over again that this was important! Life and the whole world struck me as a prison, and it bothered me beyond measure that I should again be finding all that quite in order. I had been so glad to shed it all, and now it had come about that I—along with everyone else—would again be hung up in a box by a thread.”[23]

Jung did not discount the value of the awakening he experienced during his near-death episode. Nor did he pass off the insight it provided as subjective fantasy. He treated it as a real experience that had a profound impact on his thinking. His case is important, not only for the name recognition, but also for the fact that he was a highly trained and respected observer of mental processes. Is it likely that Jung would have jeopardized his professional legacy speculating on these visions and experiences had he considered them anything but utterly real?

The Choice to Reincarnate

As I’ve mentioned, I like to think of reincarnation as a choice rather than as an evolutionary requirement. Seen this way, we can think of our earthly incarnation as something far more than Fillmore’s resurrection of damnation. With choice as the prime factor, we can logically conclude that we will incarnate on earth as long as something here holds our interest. When events or circumstances make it unattractive—a natural global catastrophe for example—it is quite conceivable that we simply refrain from taking up a body until conditions become more to our liking. It is also reasonable to consider that we may incarnate at a particular time to advance a cause, or to help rebuild a waning human population brought on by war or natural disaster.

Around seventy thousand years ago, Toba, a super volcano in Indonesia, exploded into one of earth’s largest eruptions. This environmental disaster triggered severe climate change and may have reduced the human population to as few as 3,000 to 10,000.[24] Is it unreasonable to assume that, given the choice, many fewer individuals would incarnate in such a compromised environment? On the other hand, some, like first responders, might relish the chance to rush in and help the human species recover.

Without going too far afield here, can we discount the possibility of multiple, biospheric environments existing throughout the universe? New studies estimate that our Milky Way galaxy alone contains 100 billion planets. If this is true and one environment does not appeal to our interests or fill a need we feel compelled to address, is it out of the range of possibility that we may simply choose another?

Charles Fillmore placed the soul in an evolving continuum from which the only escape was full regeneration of soul and body. His conclusion that only one person, Jesus, had successfully run this evolutionary gauntlet casts a dim light on the average individual’s chances of a full awakening in this lifetime. That he believed absolutely in this model is shown in his advocating that an extraordinary spiritual revolution was underway:

“Everywhere true metaphysicians are preparing themselves to be members in the great colony that Jesus is to set up, by working to eliminate from their mind all selfish ideas, along with all other discordant vibrations that produce inharmony among members of the same group.”[25]

I have little doubt that he envisioned Unity Village as the beginning of this great colony of true metaphysicians. In my earlier years, I would have gladly counted myself a willing and expectant resident of this great colony. I have since concluded that the image of Jesus put forward by Charles Fillmore is the product of his own speculation. The Jesus every author presents, and I include myself, is the Jesus that would exist if our specific lines of logic were correct. I’ll present my view of him in the following chapter.

The sheer ambiguity of historical facts have made Jesus fair game for a wide range of interpretations advanced as Truth. We wind up with a blend of emotionally charged imagery mixed with a line of spiritual logic that careful scrutiny or new research will likely expose as having little or no basis in historical or scientific fact.

[1] Matthew 21:23

[2] Fillmore, Charles. The Revealing Word. Unity Books

[3] Twelve Powers of Man. Charles Fillmore. Unity Books

[4] Matthew 19:28 KJV

[5] King James Version was published in 1612

[6] Revised Standard Version. 1946-1957

[7] New Revised Standard Version. 1989

[8] Mark 10:30, Luke 18:30

[9] Matthew 19:29

[10] #31, Unity’s Statement of Faith

[11]  Quotation taken from, The Spiritual Journey of Charles Fillmore. Neal Vahle. Templeton Foundation Press. 2008

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Fillmore, Charles. Christian Healing. Unity Books

[15] Fillmore, Charles. Talks on Truth. Unity Books

[16] #21, Unity’s Statement of Faith

[17] # 22, ibid

[18] #19, ibid

[19] Fillmore, Charles. Twelve Powers of Man. Unity Books

[20] Fillmore, Charles. Keep a True Lent. Unity Books

[21] Fillmore, Charles. Mysteries of Genesis. Unity Books

[22] Jung, Carl, Aniela Jaffé. 1965. Memories, Dreams, Reflections. Vintage, a division of Random House

[23] ibid

[24]  According to the genetic bottleneck theory, between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago, human populations sharply decreased to 3,000–10,000 surviving individuals. The theory is supported by genetic evidence suggesting that today’s humans are descended from a very small population of between 1,000 and 10,000 breeding pairs that existed about 70,000 years ago. (Wikipedia: Genetic Bottleneck Theory).

[25] Fillmore, Charles. Prosperity. Unity Books

The Freedom You Desire

The underlying objective behind every goal we set is the condition of greater freedom. This is helpful to consider and critical to understand. By tying our hope for greater freedom to a particular acquisition,  we are likely placing an unnecessary obstacle on the actual freedom we seek. “When I get there,” we reason, “I’ll feel good about my life.” But what about here? 

The essence of the freedom we seek is actually a spiritual condition. We want to resolve a certain situation so we can feel better. This is totally understandable and reasonable. But is there another path to this goal of feeling better, or is our declared path the only one? With the information we have on hand, we may believe our chosen approach to a given problem is the best, but there is always a better way.

Some years ago my world fell into a tailspin. I had some very clear ideas about what needed to happen if I were to regain control. When these fixes came, I reasoned, I’d be free. These, after all,  were the fixes that would resolve outstanding issues and pay the bills. I was also operating under the gnawing assumption that if my world failed, I was a failure.  My freedom, my self-esteem, my definition of success all hinged on things going a certain way. If these things didn’t happen, I’d lose the battle to sustain the conditions I believed were essential to my inner freedom.

Then a strange thing happened. While I was praying for these fixes, a powerful truth emerged from within. I rediscovered my spiritual center of strength. In one of those “darkest before the dawn” moments, I experienced a flush of inner strength and peace that assured me I’d be okay even if everything crashed. In this moment of clarity, it didn’t matter that this world I was praying to keep intact fell apart. The strength I found set me in a position high above all that I feared losing. Regardless of what happened, I knew I’d be fine.

The path that unfolded from that point on was not one I had considered. It was far better, a sentiment I shared from an earlier period in the lyrics of one of my songs, Something Spoke to Me:

Over the years I have taken some turns, to places I don’t understand.

But it took every one, to bring me here, I’ve been led by a soft guiding hand.

Faith is a very interesting faculty. When it’s directed only to the outworking of unruly circumstances, it becomes a flashlight beam that causes us think of ourselves and our life as that which is within this circle of light. Faith, in its highest function, turns off the flashlight, allows our eyes to adjust, prompts us to look up and you see the vast universe of stars spread out overhead. Occupied with life within the beam, we forget that our soul perpetually resides in a much larger, completely unfettered context. We are children, not of the flashlight beam, but of the universe. It is in this larger context that we find our spiritual center of strength, power and freedom.

When Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world, I believe he was talking about the world of flashlight beams. His kingdom was the universe, the soul’s true home. So much in our religious training misses this, as it teaches that we mere humans are destined to make due with life, to walk a straight and narrow path within the beam. I believe Jesus’ real message encourages us to turn off the flashlight, lift our spiritual eyes and behold the vast kingdom of God that is our true and eternal home.

If we are focused only on finding contentment, peace and freedom within this circle of light we call our daily earthly life, then we’re putting conditions on our freedom that in reality do not exist. Do you think the success of the universe depends on what does or does not happen within your little circle of light? The drama that unfolds on this tiny stage is inconsequential to the bigger picture. Does this mean your individual life is unimportant? No. It means that if you are to live your life successfully, you start with the understanding of your inseparable oneness with that star-studded cosmos. You draw your strength, not from the proper arrangement of things within your little circle of light, but from the larger cosmic context within which you presently live, move and have your being.

Within your circle of light, you’re likely saying there are yet four months to harvest. This or that thing must happen before I win the prize of peace and freedom. Jesus encouraged us to lift up our eyes and see the fields are ready for harvest now. Turn off the flashlight and see that you live in all you will ever need at this moment. The universe, after all, is not moving toward some state of perfection. It is perfect already, and you and I are integral expressions of it. Be perfect, even as your heavenly Father (your cosmic source) is perfect. Now this rather enigmatic statement begins to make sense.

Your goal is not the thing you desire. Your goal is the freedom you believe the thing will bring. Your goal is not the resolution of unruly circumstances that are now playing out within your flashlight beam. Your goal is to remember who and what you are. This is your center of strength, peace and power. This is the freedom you desire.

 

What is Consciousness?

Question: I hear you use the word consciousness quite a bit. Are you referring to awareness or are you talking about the sum of our belief system? Could you share your thoughts on this subject?

Response: Depending on the context, I, like many, use the term to refer both to awareness and to the sum of our belief system. When someone loses consciousness, we mean they’re unconscious. They’ve passed out. If we say someone has the consciousness to drive a car, we mean they possess the knowledge and skill to operate the vehicle without thinking about it. You have the consciousness for a thing when you unconsciously process all the mechanics involved while you are doing the thing. The musician goes from merely reading and playing notes to making our spirit soar. The painter’s eye is no longer on technique but on the subject that literally dances across the canvas. Nearly anyone can learn technique, but not everyone crosses into that consciousness we associate with true artistry.

When we speak of developing a consciousness for health, prosperity or any desired state, we’re talking about so aligning our awareness with an already established ideal that the expression of this ideal becomes the inevitable result. Yes, the artist learns technique. But learning technique is not the goal. The goal is the expression of an ideal they see and feel at a deep level.

Building consciousness is a two-fold process involving the technique of denial and affirmation. Denial, in this context, is not ignoring or pretending there is no proverbial elephant in the room. Denial is releasing the mental and emotional energy we’re pouring into the elephant, the negative appearance.  We’re shifting from treating the appearance as a power to be overcome, to the understanding that it is our own energy concerning the appearance that is to be redirected. We do not start with an attack on the appearance that we want to change. We start with the ideal we want to express. We do this by releasing the crosscurrents of mental and emotional energy we’re pouring into the appearance, and we seek a deeper experience with the ideal. Otherwise, we end up lobbing affirmations like artillery shells at the elephant. Our consciousness is a house divided. One condition must be eliminated before the ideal can come forth.

I believe Jesus was referring to this principle when he suggested that true prayer is the act of accepting we have already received that for which we ask. To the head, this is illogical. But it is not from the head that we pray. Memorized prayers or oft repeated affirmations do not make true believers of us. Prayer is a heart process, an intuitive, experiential receptivity. It is an understanding that what appears to be true of the body is not true of the soul. The body may indeed be ill. This is the elephant in the room. The soul, however, is whole. In one sense Jesus is saying that we are to make our soul’s wholeness the new elephant in the room. At the fundamental level you and I are whole right now. We release all mental and emotional energy that contradicts this truth and we seek to move deeper into the experience of the soul.

We don’t use spoken denials and affirmations to force a thing to be true. We speak words that realign our awareness with what is already true at the soul level. We release our association with this sickly body and we affirm what is true of the soul. When we say, “I am whole and complete, and my wholeness is shining forth through this body now,” we are speaking the truth. We do not want to deny the condition of ill health, as in pretending that it isn’t present.  We want to release all belief that this condition is some kind of out-picturing  of our spiritual essence.

This principle applies to all negative appearances. The soul lacks nothing. It is our consciousness, our belief system, that runs interference with this truth. We develop a consciousness of wholeness in all areas by first seeking an experience of what is true of our soul. In our quiet times we envision the soul’s radiance beaming out through our body and circumstances until this truth becomes our positive elephant in the room. We shift from a consciousness of belief to a consciousness of knowing that the expression of our soul’s wholeness, in all areas of our life, is the inevitable result.

Announcement

If you’ve been following my Sunday talks on YouTube from this site, please go instead to Unity Talks Online

For updates on current talks, you can subscribe to Unity Talks Online or directly to our Youtube channel.

The Awakened Soul is devoted to my writings and the occasional video. Unity Talks Online is devoted to the work I publish through my ministry at Unity Church. We’re just simplifying things a bit.

Thanks for your continued support.

Goldfish and Trout

[Excerpt from forthcoming revision of Native Soul.]

Some, having come to realize that their consciousness is structured around misleading senses-based information, con­clude that the surface identity they show the world, the personality, represents a barrier between where they are in their current spiritual understanding and where they need to be. Because the majority of our perceived restrictions do indeed have their origins at this surface level, we’ve come to regard the personality and the soul almost as polar oppo­sites. The soul is good and in need of development while the personality is a thing to be overcome, perhaps even discarded.

In her classic work What Are You? author Imelda Octavia Shanklin explains why living strictly from the personal level is so unsatisfying:

When you identify yourself solely with the personal you are not satisfied. There is a lack for which you cannot account, but which is very real to you. If you should voice your feeling you perhaps would say, “I want something. I do not know what it is that I want, but when I receive what I want I shall be satisfied.” Knowing the personal, only, you have but superficial knowledge of yourself. Beneath the surface the rich deeps of life summon you with overmastering appeal. Not knowing how to respond, you have a sense of confusion and restless­ness.

The personality does indeed become a restricting factor when we see it as the defining essence of our being. A goldfish raised in a small fishbowl, for example, is perfectly content with its limited envi­ronment, for it knows nothing different. Place a wild trout in that same glass bowl and it will jump out. The trout knows a world beyond that glass boundary and it will not adapt to this confinement.

Our soul is the wild trout that we’re attempting to stuff in the fishbowl of personality. In our quest for finding satisfaction within the artificial confines of this bowl, we adorn it with a pretty ceramic castle, colored pebbles and some plastic greenery. This works for a time, but soon the frustration returns. So we buy a prettier castle, adorn our bowl with designer pebbles and decorate it with living greenery. It’s perfect—if you happen to be a goldfish.

Though we wander far into the distractions of maintaining the surface self-image, we never forget who we are at the soul level. The soul constantly asserts itself as an intuitive whisper of discontent, a still small voice[1] that never fully endorses the artificial trappings of the fishbowl.

Our cultural training suggests this dissatisfaction is a personality or character issue, so we engage in a determined effort for self-improvement. Improving the personality, however, isn’t the answer, as the personality is not the problem. The personality an effect. It simply echoes our own self-definition. The problem is that we carry the self-image of a goldfish when we’re really a trout. We’re trying to stuff our soul into a fishbowl personality that just doesn’t fit.

As we turn our attention to the gentle radiance of the soul, we return to the figurative wild stream, the most fitting personality of our natural being.

[1] 1 Kings 19:12

One Presence, One Power

YouTube: One Presence, One Power

For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever. Amen

This final line in the Lord’s Prayer is our equivalent of saying, There is but one presence and one power in the universe: God, the Good, omnipotent. This is a fitting realization to hold for any prayer.

How many times have you prayed for some greater good in your life and then you closed your prayer with the attitude: I hope it works. The closing line, which is not actually found in the Bible, is an affirmation that there are no blocks, no negative powers working against you, and no reason to expect anything but the highest and best outworking of the thing that concerns you. Amen is a seal of acceptance, an affirmation of so be it, or so it is. You could conceptually translate the line like this: My greater good now unfolds completely unhindered in wonderful ways that work for the highest good of all, and I receive it now.

One of the best ways to approach the idea of prayer is to treat it as a creative process. When you pray, you are opening yourself to God as a Creative Life Force. You are planting a seed and agreeing to allow it to grow as a new condition in your life. When you plant a seed, you release it with the certain expectation that this tiny package of potential will produce in a certain way. You do not, however, meddle in the growing process. You trust, and you keep the growing environment free of hindrances to its growth. The tiny sprout that appears looks nothing like the full plant that you know is coming forth, but this does not concern you. You know something good is happening and you are patient and expectant with the growing process.

You and I do not have the power to influence the way God behaves. We do, however, have the power to put ourselves in harmony with God’s expansive behavior. We do this through the acceptance that the greater good we desire is now coming forth in perfect timing and in perfect order. And so it is.

 

 

Meditation

[The question that follows was presented to me yesterday via email. I thought a good way to respond was to share this brief excerpt from the revised introduction to my forthcoming book, The Awakened Soul. JDB]

Question: I’m a little confused about the whole idea of meditation. What’s your take on it?

The practice of meditation—periods of deliberate spiritual receptivity—is the narrow gate (Matt. 7:13-14) by which you enter the domain of your fully developed soul. If you are meditating yet failing to experience your spiritual essence, you are not meditating, you are thinking. Meditation is the act of opening your intuitive portal, a faculty specifically designed to tap the domain of the soul.

Becoming successful at meditation does not require years of training, for there is actually very little to learn. Meditation is a receptive state that opens your awareness to the natural influence of your soul’s radiance, a practice of internal reflection to be treated, not as spiritual development, but rather as a spiritual homecoming.

You already know how to receive spiritual light from your own inner source, as you’ve been doing so all along. The inspiration you think you receive from books and teachers is actually a confirmation of what you already know to be true. Those passages you highlight with a yellow marker represent your gospel embodied in the words of another. If you didn’t already have the eyes to see and the ears to hear it, these soul-stirring ideas would pass unnoticed. It is not something new in you that is being stimulated. Rather it is something that has been with you always. You are responding from your soul, this authentic core that has become lost in the plethora of confused crosscurrents generated by your body-based identity.

Reflections

Question: I look forward to reading your book. Could you please explain the sentence about spiritual discernment and how the world we see is a reflection of how we see ourselves?

Response: Let’s say we have two people, one is a real estate developer and the other a farmer. Both see a fifty-acre parcel of land for sale. One, the developer, will see the potential for new housing on this land. The other, the farmer, will see the potential for growing produce. Each is seeing this same parcel of land (the world) but from a very different perspective (how they see themselves).

Do we see the world as a place to give or do we see it as an opportunity to take? It depends on how we see ourselves. If you are self-confident and feel you have a gift to share with the world, you will be a giver, and you will treat the world accordingly. If you suffer from low self-esteem and you’re always trying to fill that inner void with people, places, and things, you’ll be a taker, and you’ll treat the world accordingly. The first sees the world as a place to express their strength. The second sees the world as a resource to help cover for their weakness.

I’ve performed around a thousand weddings in my career. I can tell the difference between a couple who has come together in strength and a couple who has come together in weakness.  Two halves don’t make a whole. Only two wholes make a strong and lasting relationship. We don’t find the rest of our self in another. We find the rest of our self in our self.  That saying, “You complete me” was obviously written by a person who didn’t get the memo. How much better it is to say, “You inspire the best in me.” How we view the “world” of relationships, is determined by how the individuals involved view themselves.

In the “world” of careers, do I enter one for what I can give, or do I think only of what I can get?  Say you own a business and you have a position to fill. You have two applicants. After long interviews you see person #1 is applying because they love the business, and they’re very enthused about what they can do to help it succeed. Person #2 is applying because you’re offering great benefits. Which one will you hire, the giver or the taker? Each sees the position (the world) according to how they see themselves. I want the position because I have much to give. I want the position because I have many needs.

Some see the world as a grand opportunity. Others see the world as a prison. Why? What’s the difference? Do we not all occupy the same beautiful blue ball we call earth? On the surface, the answer should be yes, we all occupy the same planet. In truth, however, each person occupies the planet as they understand it. We don’t see the world as it is. We see the world as we are. Emerson said it this way: “You can only see what you are.”

I’ve used this illustration before, but it’s appropriate here. When I first learned to downhill ski, I was completely intimidated. Growing up in Missouri, we were not in the habit of strapping seven-foot boards to our feet and sliding down snow-covered hills … standing up. On my second or third time out, a friend took me to Vail and left me to fend for myself on a very tame slope. Somehow I got off that green level slope and ended up on a terrifying blue. Fortunately, an angel dressed like an elderly man saw that I was not actually an ice sculpture frozen on the side of the mountain. He helped me ease down to safety. To make a long story short, by the end of that season, I skied that terrifying slope without even realizing it was the same place until later. Same slope, different person. The first time I saw myself as a quivering wannabe skier. The second time I saw myself as a skier. This shift in my own self-perception had everything to do with how I saw that mountain.

I hope this helps. Thanks for asking your question.

 

 

 

How to Change The World

[Note: As I’ve mentioned, I’m in the process of editing my book, Native Soul (first published by Unity House in 2011). I’m making a few minor changes to bring the manuscript more in line with my current thinking. I’ll release this work under the new title, The Awakened Soul. The following excerpt is a brief tidbit I thought you might appreciate. JDB]

It’s fair to say that most of us believe the visible realm contains the things that will complete us. We spend a great deal of time and effort looking to the visible for these missing and elusive elements. In this quest for completion, we are likely to think that getting what we want from life is the process of being directed to material success, which increases our stature and makes us feel complete with the least amount of effort. If, on the other hand, you see yourself as a spiritual being that is already complete, and you think of the material realm as offering  opportunities to reflect your completeness, you will have a very different relationship with the material dimension.

Many are convinced that the world is in dire need of change. Spiritual discernment reveals that the world as we see it is simply a reflection of the vision of ourselves that we carry. In your quiet time, observe the part of you that is chasing after things, even spiritual enlightenment, and stop the chase. Incessant thinking is only you running after a state of being that you fail to see as already present as you now. Let your awakening spirit change your vision and you will be amazed by how different the world appears.