Add new comment

My Story: Reading the Cosmic Glyphs

“Thomas Young and John Francois Champillion deciphered from an ancient Egyptian stone, found in 1799 near Rosetta (Rashid), how to interpret hieroglyphic writing. The code of the evolving universe, a scripture more ancient and complex than hieroglyphs, energetically writes quantum-electric resonance into all cosmic embodiment. The embodiment of energetic resonance is the mechanism and purpose of communication, consciousness and conscience. “One’s personal life may be compelled by the immediate necessities of survival, which may prevent one individually from reflecting on the grand scheme of things, never-theless, such reflection is wholesome and necessary, for deeper knowledge of cosmic processing may enlighten the symbiotic reconciliation of intentional human purpose with intensional quantum-electric necessity. In sum, this is the underlying assumption and insight of the Second Enlightenment Trilogy. “The date I associate with my professional foray into the complexity of the science-religion connection is February / March 1957. By this time my studies of philosophy and theology brought me to positions that seemed logically compelling. The first position pertains to God’s essential connection in creation: if highest perfection is in God, God’s work must reflect the continuity of highest perfection; the perfection of continuity requires the absence of disconnection, for a disconnected work is a less perfect work. “The second position arises from the first: cosmic rationality must reflect divine rationality; divine rationality cannot frustrate cosmic rationality, namely, in its expectation of realized participation in divinity. Consistent with Albert Einstein’s equation of Special Relativity, embodied consciousness, material and spiritual, is unity. So says cosmic continuity. “The compulsion to investigate these conclusions pushed me to a sense of need to give equal time to scientific study as I had given to theological. My perceived need to pursue science professionally was a compelling factor in my decision to discontinue my pursuit of the Catholic priesthood. “Postgraduate studies in science began for me in the summer of 1957 with a first course in genetics at DePaul University, Chicago. I returned to Iowa in September of that year and some months later matriculated in a graduate program of studies (Botany) at Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. I graduated in May of 1960 with a Master of Science degree in Plant Physiology. “Marriage in June 1959 and the birth of our first daughter in April 1960 took precedence over my avocation of pursuing the science-religion-connection, though it always occupied a stratum of my conscious interest. "By the early 1980s, life circumstances allowed me to redirect more attention to the submersed stratum of interest. I began reading and writing on the subjects of science and religion. My first manuscript (c.1983) was titled, “EARTHEOLOGY: The Phenomenon of God”. In trying to write publishable material I came to realize that my expertise was too shallow to produce a convincing product. The subject matter was so multi-faceted and complexly related that I soon realized I lacked background for making connections. Realizing this from the outset, I plunged ahead open to wherever the plunge might take me. "In keeping with spiritual advice I trusted my insights and prayed constantly that the cosmic voice within would lead me in some purposeful direction. I read and read. I did not try to write from the constraint of some preconceived logic, only by the logic of openness to invention. As pertinent insights came together I put my pen to paper. After accumulating stacks of hand-written material I began to think how forbiddingly heavy it all was. It occurred to me that breaking the material down into manageable bites could make it more interesting and intelligible, so, “poetry”, I thought, “is the way to go”. Poetry would make the material more immediate. “By 1985 I had rewritten EARTHEOLOGY; what was new about it were additions of quotes from other authors at the beginnings of chapters, and at chapter endings, a pertinent poem. By 1992 I had enough poems written that I believed they might be publishable on their own merit, so I self-published them under the title “New Genesis Poems”. This publication was trilogy-like, that is, it was divided into three parts under the headings Communication, Consciousness and Conscience. “I had come to a sense of the working of human rationality through history and the ascendancy of consciousness by the process of communication, and of coming to conscience by the interactive processes of communication and consciousness. It occurred to me that the rational processing of these three constituted the cosmic rationality of evolved ascendancy, which bore directly on “Creation Theology”. Because this sense had become so compelling to me, all my subsequent writings came together in the tri-logic form by which my thinking was beginning to evolve and have continuity of its own. “Social scientists have, as a group, I suspect, come to a consensus that consciousness is evolutionary and that the direction of civil ascendancy is generally upward even if history documents serious regression along with grudging progress. A critical question to be asked in the face of modern predicaments is what strategy does nature model that sustains ascendancy and mitigates frictions that frustrate civility, such things as war, disease, waste, pollution and self-aggrandizing obsession? For as post-modernity witnesses, compulsion to obsessive consumerism frustrates civility and destabilizes future sustainability. “Allow me to suggest that the cosmos has etched in stone and flesh the dialogic forms and processes of quantum relativity that structure the continuity and clarify the logic of intentional living consistent with the intensional necessity of cosmic-electric rationality and its reliable search of resonance for workable, sustainable outcomes —“purposeful” objectives. “From the beginnings of cosmic evolution after the big bang the unified ascendancy of energy/ matter began a journey that continues in our own persons. It seems apparent that each of us individually, and humankind globally, can advance religiously and civilly only by conforming intentional life to nature’s intensional, symbiotic, paradigmatic processes of communication, consciousness, and conscience. Globally, people act rightly when they model intentional fidelity to the necessities of cosmic evolution, and when they engage reflectively the processes of 'trimorphic resonance' in all relationships, whether with people, plants, animals, water, soil or sky. “The lessons of cosmic religion are lessons of relationships encoded in primary scripture. The rising consciousness of rationality is by way of quantum religion. Personal conscience is the continuing and faithful means of religion & civility. 'Trimorphic resonance' is the “Rosetta Code”. Trimorphic resonance is cosmic rationality’s process of continual enlightenment; human intention (purpose) can either advance in fidelity to it or frustrate it. The choice is personal and collective, not one or the other, but both. Ignorance fixated in arrogance always has outcomes of disaster; and until we honestly admit the fact of our ignorance we will continue to act arrogantly. Will we ever learn to test our personal ignorance against life’s evolutionary wisdom and conform personal codes of conduct to nature’s proven codes of evolutionary success? Yes, if we can be faithful to cosmic rationality. “Why dredge up now the Counter-Reformation history of the Catholic Church? Because it seems very clear that lines are now drawn for a new cultural war within Roman Catholicism between the ecclesiologies of Vatican I and Vatican II. That this is true, is documented in a new book Evolving Visions of the Priesthood by Dean R. Hoge and Jacqueline E. Wenger, Liturgical Press, ISBN 0814628052, reviewed by Katarina Schuth in AMERICA, A Jesuit Magazine, Vol. 190 No 4, Whole No. 4639, February 9, 2004, Pp 26-27. “Reviewer Schuth quotes Jesuit John A. Coleman to the effect “that seminaries have the responsibility to provide proper theological formation in order to prevent future priests from adopting a pre-Vatican II posture: rigid, clerical and close-minded.” The disjunction between younger priests and older priests clearly exists, and it is persistent, destructive and unacceptable. The reviewer quotes the book as to the contrasting views of younger priests for older priests and of older priests for younger priests: “Younger priests called the older priests liberals, leftist fringe, secularized, anti-establishment, a ‘lost generation,’ and priests with a social work model.” “Older priests referred to the young men as inflexible, divisive, liturgically conservative, institutional, hierarchical, and believers in cultic priesthood.” The catholic priesthood is already in crisis and a new clerical war within the church between conflicting ecclesiologies can only deepen the crises, aggravate lay distrust and render the priesthood more irrelevant than it already is. "The crisis caused by the seventeenth century Counter-Reformation is a cautionary tale that young priests and old, and all people need to understand and take seriously. This threatening new war, like the old, roots in conflicting worldviews and in incorrigible attitudes. Vatican II, in view of modern evolutionary consciousness, rightly calls for new theological analysis and synthesis that get beyond the problems of the dead and destructive absolutisms of centrism and staticism.