God.”[1] It is clear that in such a system of pantheism, “Principle” is the best name for God, and God is not to be thought of as a person.
This subject gave Mrs. Eddy much trouble. She hardly knows what to do with it. There are repeated efforts to free her theology from what she felt is a very damaging defect. Accordingly, when we put together her various statements, contradictions are manifest. But plain statements, as well as her many synonyms and numberless references to God, together with the place which he occupies in her metaphysical system, compel us to think of what she calls God as something impersonal. Mrs. Eddy can refer to her god by means of the pronoun, “she,” as well as the pronoun, “he,”[2] and for her one is really as good as the other, but the impersonal pronoun “it” would be the best. Her god is an “it.” See that she does really so speak of it.
Once when a friend, who was a stranger to my little girl, eighteen months old, who did not yet know how to distinguish between the pronouns, came to visit us, the inquisitive child stepped around and quietly asked, “Papa, what is it?” It was the child's innocence that made it funny. Had she known better it would have been impudence. When we look at the young baby in the mother's arms shall we ask “What is his name?” But we do not know whether the baby is a boy or a girl. So we may ask the proud
- ↑ S. and H. p. 336.
- ↑ Cf. S. and H. pp. 256 and 331f.
