“Our time calls us to be prophetic rather than religious, psychological rather than theological. Psychology has a prophetic aspect insofar as it reaches further into the soul and knows its condition, especially in times of transition.”
~ David Tacey, Jungian Author
I believe that it is important to remember that in the early days of the New Thought Movement, our philosophy (Oneness, One Mind) and theologies (various applications of mental science) were in tune with the latest scientific understandings of the day and with the emerging discoveries of the new field of western psychology.
Because of this, New Thought principles were considered revolutionary within the sphere of religion and spirituality. Moving from the dogmatic approaches based on very old texts subject to the interpretation of a priestly class and some sovereign rulers, to a more liberated use of self-image psychology, which included visualization (prayer-treatment) which is the process of building belief by thought and feeling. Prayer was no longer to an external deity in whom all power resided, but was rather to treat oneself to change belief so that the divine power could flow in a more beneficial way.
The inclusion of state-of-the-art psychological principles and a shift of the locus of control of the individual from outside to within were prophetic notions for the time. They still are for some; however, New Thought theology has not kept up with the progress of science and psychology during the past century. The essence of this dynamic is captured by Diana Butler Bass in the following quote.
“Religious faiths struggle between the pastoral and the prophetic, comfort and agitation. In a very real way, institutions are inherently pastoral—they seek to maintain those things that give comfort by baptizing shared values and virtues of a community. They reinforce the way things are (or were) through appeals to divine or supernatural order. They are always slow to change. Institutions resist prophets. Prophets question. They push for things to be different. They push people to behave better toward one another. They want change.”
~ Diana Butler Bass
As a student of New Thought history, I have often pondered the trajectory of the movement. It began as a branch of a then-popular spiritual healing of physical ailments movement in the late 19th Century. It evolved into a more psychologically-driven movement of broader mental healing (relationships, finances and more in addition to physical) featuring an expanded use of psychological principles in the early decades of the 20th Century. Then it focused more on structured classes, including efforts to attain accreditation from accepted educational institutions. Since the 1990’s, the dynamic has been to have continue to have communities, to allow other types of ministries than spiritual community, and to have the size of spiritual communities trend smaller and to have credentialling standards become less rigorous.
In Spiral Dynamics terms, the movement has gone from being centered at BLUE-Orange to ORANGE-Blue to Orange, to ORANGE-Green to Green. As we have evolved, the theology has shifted from the absolute approach of Blue (you are your consciousness) to the self-help approach of Orange (I should have good and can have anything I accept for myself) to the non-judgmentalism of Green (who am I to judge you or to tell you about your consciousness?). While these categories generalize, I believe they get at the essence of how the theology has evolved along with the culture of the movement.
The inherent conflict between the prophetic and the pastoral always arises as faith traditions age. The old joke is that after the founder dies, the theology begins to suffer from “truth decay.” This is the inevitable result of having others interpret the theology and the reality of changing times and cultural evolution. Theology which doesn’t evolve becomes stale and irrelevant.
“Being a prophet demands two seemingly opposites: radical traditionalism and shocking iconoclasm at the same time. If people see just one of those first, they’ll presume you’re only that. ‘Oh, he’s just a pious little Christian boy’ or ‘She’s an angry woman!’ They cannot imagine that those two can really coexist, tame, and educate one another. Holding the tension of opposites is the necessary education of the prophet, and the Church has given little energy to it. Frankly, it takes non-dual thinking to pull this off, and we have pretty much trained people in the simplistic choosing of one idealized alternative while denigrating the other.”
~ Richard Rohr
The growing complexity of our cultures necessitates a new look at our theological principles and how they are shared. The purpose is to ensure that they incorporate what we have learned in the past century about human psychology and related science. It is time to listen to the prophets in the movement; yes, we do have prophetic voices, not only about the need for greater involvement in the world around us, but also the need to uplevel our theology to meet the needs of the present.
As uncomfortable as that may be for some, it is essential for New Thought to return to being a wayshower in the spiritual world if we are to be a relevant source of spiritual nourishment for greater numbers.
In future posts, I will explore some of the ways that New Thought theology can be updated to reflect a more current worldview and to prepare for an even more uncertain future.
“A true prophet always starts as a heretic.”
~ Bishop Yvette Flunder
As always, your comments are welcomed.
If you are leaving or have left Facebook and would like to continue to receive notices of publications on this blog, you can find these posts on BlueSky at @JimLockard.bsky.social – or you can put your email in the space provided on this page and receive first notice of new posts.
Copyright 2025 – Jim Lockard
New Thought Evolutionary 