Exit To Entrance
A Post for NCRcafe: Exit to Entrance
By Marie Schickel Rottschaefer
Vol. 2 No. 2 June 23, 2008
The goal of these posts is to give a brief overview of developments that have relevance for us in the early 21st century, particularly in seeking solutions for pressing people and planet problems.
Nota Bene to Exit to Entrance Readers
In previous writings such as New Search, I have tried to either define terms or refer the reader to a reference. Almost all of my writing is based on other peoples’ writings except for my modest creative attempt to weave those writings together to draw a reasonable conclusion by connecting the dots. You, the Readers, may reach your own conclusions. IF YOU WISH FURTHER EXPLANATION, THE REFERENCES ARE THERE TO ACCOMMODATE YOU. THERE YOU WILL FIND THE ANSWERS YOU SEEK.
I say this because a respondent to a recent post said “I need to get a better fix on what "axial" amd [sic]"post-axial" mean here.†My response to him is that by doing some homework he will find his answer in the very first New Search back in Oct. 2006. According to Loyal Rue, Religion is not about God: How spiritual traditions nurture our biological nature and what to expect when they fail (Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick NJ: 2005), the Axial Age religions appear to have run their course. Rue says that the Axial Age begins about the 6th century B.C.E. Its influence is with us to the present. For now we can speak of it as “the age that transformed the psychological and social organization of the human species.â€
My point is this. With enough well prepared readers, fruitful dialogue becomes a possibility. Respectfully I say, that without that preparation, chat consisting of irrelevant counter arguments becomes the norm. READERS OUGHT TO EXPECT RESPONSES THAT FIT WITH THE READING SOURCES PRESENTED. If a person wants to do something else, which is the case with most of you who have responded in the past, then she or he can submit another post that speaks to his/her concern, but separate from Exit To Entrance table. I’ve stated this message before and probably will not do it again. You don’t have to respond at all, which is also the case for most of you. That’s absolutely fine by me especially until we get much further into the issues. These issues are not small; they are monumental and demand the kind of careful consideration provided by the referenced resources.
But I have another reason for doing this project in the way that I am doing it. Exit To Entrance is simply a “brief overview†as stated in the goal above. It points to sources and basic ideas. Consider me if you will, as a weather vane! As is clear to all of us, NCRcafe is not a system intended for lengthy discourse. Today’s world is one of scarce resources, one facing a multifaceted global crisis. A constant message of our culture ought to be to practice extraordinary prudence in our use of assets in order to save resources and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, etc. For all these reasons, brief and to the point posts are the virtue of the day.
Well-prepared readers and participants should make use of the references that I suggest. They can be obtained from the library or Internet. For example, I refer to Louis Dupre’s letter published in The New York Review of Books in 1984. Though relatively dated, it has been scanned on to the Internet, and although it has gaps, it is readable. If some people can obtain several of the readings, read and reflect on them and make even one comment or ask one question based on the readings (take your pick whether it’s Dupre or anyone else), Exit To Entrance would be greatly enhanced. If hardly anyone wants to do this, as has been the case since New Search and Exit to Entrance have been in existence, the project could close for lack of genuine interest.
There’s a cost/benefit ratio to consider. The authors to whom I refer are esteemed for their contributions to society in a time of great need. If one wants to play one-upmanship with them, this is not the venue for such a game. Is it not cavalier to counter argue with them especially if you have not even read, let alone read carefully, what they are saying? To engage constructively in the conversation, should one not show that she or he has read the relevant sources and is able to respond to them in a to the point manner? This is the time for us to learn from these scholarly sources. Then we will be ready to share with others what they have shared with us. Perhaps, in addition, we will then be able to genuinely contribute further to the conversation. This is the nature of education. I don’t have a problem with carefully counter argued responses to what these scholars are saying, but please show me the evidence that you have carefully considered what they have said and the reasons for your disagreement! I have seen very little relevant response to the references I have presented in the many months I’ve been doing this since Oct. 2006.
As I have mentioned, huge changes pertinent to Catholicism are in the offing. But if Catholics themselves will not face these manifest realities, then the consequences for Catholicism and the world will be that much more intense. I acknowledge that NCRcafe may not be the venue for Exit to Entrance. I’d like to present some of the exciting ideas but there has to be enough relevant substantive give and take to make it worthwhile. Only time will tell if that happens and Exit to Entrance is a workable project.
Dear Marie, Are you writing
Dear Marie, Are you writing a book on the coming church?
The nature of education is
The nature of education is to educate. I am not sure what you are trying to educate us about, since you have really given so little in the way to even begin discussion. You say, "huge changes pertinent to Catholicism are in the offing" but you do not say what changes are in the offing. You make some reference to some scholars that you are familiar with, but you fail to interject what you are in agreement or disagreement with them about and how we might learn from your experience being familiar with them. Perhaps with that in mind we might get somewhere in the discussion that would be satisfactory. What can we discuss when what you seem to say seems to be so cryptic with very little in the way of real communication from you?
You said "if Catholics themselves will not face these manifest realities, then the consequences for Catholicism and the world will be that much more intense." You do not say what "manifest realities" you are referring to, so is it any wonder there is no discussion here?
Marie, correct me if I’m
Marie, correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems to me that your “exit/ entrance� correlation is the equivalent of Louis Dupré’s correlation of “end/ means�. In the transformational dynamic of evolution, everything is means/ end to everything else.
The global evolution of human communities is by way of transformational consciousness evolving from prior understanding (status-quo-ante) to newly informed understandings (status-quo-post). Means/ end continuity in personal/ social consciousness is prior “end� (outcome, “exit�) which becomes new “means� (“entrance�) to a new outcome (“exit�). This iterative process ever continues in consciousness processing (evolution), as in “trimorphic protennoia�, i.e, communication-consciousness-conscience.
Metannoia, (conversion, “metamorphosis�) is a trimorphic process of protennoia, that is, of the evolution of “first knowledge� in the ever evolving consciousness of new knowledge, changed consciousness  “cogitata perficiendo, cogitando sic perfecta�
Louis Dupré, “Reason…functions in a system where everything has become end and means�, from
(“The Enlightenment and Intellectual Foundations of Modern Culture�, pg 17, © 2004, Yale University Press; also, THE POSSIBLE JOURNEY, Sylvester L. Steffen, © 2006, www.authorhouse.com, “Eucharistic Process: Means as Ends, Ends as Means, Appendix E: E-Consciousness, the Science of Religion�, pg 54
“Axial Age� (Christianity-based culture, imperial, up to Trent) effected, for one thing, the categorical schism between matter and energy, soul and body, and spirituality and secularity. People and nature have come to be sacrilegiously exploited as a consequence of dominion theology’s cultural disdain toward nature, toward materiality. Postmodernity (“Postaxial�, Thomas Berry’s “Ecozoic Age�) is moving into new quantum-science understanding of the unity/ continuity of energy/ matter, soul/ body, and spirituality/ secularity, i.e., the “Sacrament of Natural Order�.
[An aside: In May of 2005, my wife and I spent the month of May in Madrid, Spain, celebrating the graduation of our first grandson from the International College, Spain (ICS). I took Loyal Rue’s book “Religion isn’t about God� with me and studied it thoroughly. I made copious notes. I know Loyal Rue personally. I have discussed the future of religion with him in his Luther College Campus Office at Decorah, Iowa, prior to the publication of his book. I gave him some of my writings. One of our daughters teaches religion at the largest Decorah Lutheran Church. I may be a bit better informed in your subject matter than my postings suggest; all in good faith, all in good humor. I wish you every success in your every enterprise.]
My question is if other new terms for historical periods are needed; whether “axial� and “postaxial� contribute anything more than the terms already being used.
I understand the “axial age� as the time period in which the static-centrist worldview (SWV) prevailed in European Christian culture up to the Council of Trent  what is “Premodernity�.
I associate “Modernity� with First Enlightenment and the deconstruction of SWV, imperialism, etc; I associate “Postmodernity� with the findings of quantum science and the new understanding of Earth-cosmic unity and continuity, since the early 1900s; Einstein’s E= MC², specifically.
“Postaxial�, it seems to me, corresponds to Postmodernity which is replacing SWV with EWV. I like the term “Second Enlightenment" as an equivalent to Postmodernity. “Second� Enlightenment seems useful to distinguish from the deficiencies of Modernity and First Enlightenment, i.e., energy/ matter equivalency.
My sense is that Axial and Postaxial are unnecessary proliferations of terms that confuse. I’m sorry if what I write is unhelpful to you.
I have a sense that Loyal Rue’s book “Religion is not about God� is to the point that the “Axial Age�, its theology, religion and politics have come to a dead end because among other things it condoned and fostered the pillage and waste of people and nature, in God’s name, and advocated(s) for dominion theology and patriarchal politics.
I must say that I subscribe to the belief that the theology and politics of guilt and fear lead to desperate and dead ends, and that the religion of guilt and fear has been (is) more about irreligion and incivility than it is about God. Witness the Karl Rovean (ala Rush Limbaugh) tactic of political warfare that hyper ventilates rightist vitriole in order to demonize opposition candidates and polarize the electorate over hot-button religious/ social issues.
The tactics of slander and religious pretense are at work this election cycle. When the religious right, the absolutists of all stripes are party to calculated mean mindedness it seems very clear that they behave irreligiously and uncivilly; "religious" contention that aligns itself to such behavior cannot claim to be “about God�. We need to ask ourselves “what are we coming to?�
Thomas Berry and his School have developed the insight of needed religious awareness of human dependency on ecology/ zoology, and the need to secure ecozoical nature (google “Ecozoic Era�). The word “ecozoic� is apt and elegant in that it reinforces the Land/ God/ Human Covenant of the Old Testament and the sense of Sacrament in the New Testament.
In my writings I customarily refer back to what I call the Sacrament of Natural Order, "Naturalis Sacramentum Ordinis", whether it is with respect to the "Eucharistic" work of natural transformation, or whether it is with respect to the co-existential equality of maleness and femaleness in Godhead understanding.
The word "ecozoic" embodies Sacrament for me. Sacrament is essentially about "sacred remembrance" (sacrum meminisse). Cosmic intelligence is embodied in "ecozoic" reality (relation, religion), which is expressive in cosmic evolution. The dynamic unity and continuity of cosmic creation is well captured in "ecozoic nature".
The "ecological" aspect (eco) of Natural Sacrament is its sentient "forms", its physical "signs" that characterize the organic complex of web-life from its aboriginal beginnings to its present global complexity.
The "zoological" (zoic) aspect of Natural Sacrament is the energetic dynamic of vital spirituality (substantiated light), that is, nature's "function" which is "housed" ecologically, and which is always apt in the physical accomplishment of transformational purposes and the unfolding reality of Intelligent Design. Ecozoic Nature is harmonized in form and function, in sign and grace  which harmony is essentially one in matter/ energy and soul/ body, whether matter/ energy in the cosmic system or in the bodies/ soul(s) of organic Earth’s ecozoic systems of life.
Eucharist in Nature is purposeful prevision/provision, which at the instance of Divine Presence signifies in form what it effects in function, namely, evolutionary purpose and process. Thus, when Teilhard de Chardin celebrated Mass he celebrated the "Mass of the Universe", that is, his Eucharistic consciousness of "ecozoic nature"  from and in which we have our being, to which we are "covenantally" obligated and return.
Global awakening to ecozoic mutuality is the "Great Work" Thomas Berry calls for. The "work" of Church, Nature and God is inseparably linked; if we fail nature, we fail Church, we fail God, and when Church fails nature, God, all life suffers, the Cosmos suffers, God suffers. “Religion is not about God� if it if is mindless toward nature and when it is a party to the sacrilege of Divine Presence and purpose in ecozoic nature.
With every ENDING, a new BEGINNING.